Fat Pig of Qatar Slams American Failure To Finish the War He Started In Syria

[[How is it that this piece of shit can conduct his own international foreign policy, employing the very terrorists that we are fighting a perpetual war against?]

Qatar emir slams ‘international inaction’ over Syria

The international community’s inaction on Syria is “no longer acceptable,” Qatari emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, said.

• 

AFP, Doha -

The emir of Qatar, a strong supporter of the Syrian rebels, on Monday slammed what he called inaction by the international community over the conflict there, lamenting the failure to reach a political solution.

“It is no longer acceptable that influential states in the international community do not act to end the horrific tragedy and escalating humanitarian catastrophe” in Syria, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani told the Doha Forum.

He appeared to allude to Western countries, which have failed to agree to arm Syrian rebels, as the revolt against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime entered its third year in March.

Activists say more than 94,000 people have been killed.

He said that those countries, which he did not name, “want to decide themselves who should be the defender of the Syrian people,” in an apparent reference to concerns about the presence of radical Islamists among Syrian rebels.

Sheikh Hamad lamented the “failure of all international and Arab initiatives to get the Syrian regime to listen to the sound of reason.”

He expressed “sorrow at seeing the revolution of the Syrian people enter its third year without the clear perspective of an end to the bloodshed… because of the regime’s insistence on a military solution.”

The United States and Russia, a strong Assad ally, have proposed a peace conference for June, bringing together representatives of the regime and its opponents, with the aim of reaching a political solution.

It Is Time for America To “Back-Off” and Let the Arab and Turk Vultures Fight It Out In the Middle East

[Col. Ralph Peters is the infamous author of the divisive 2006 article, Blood Borders, on the Balkanization plan for the Greater Middle East and the map included below.  He makes great sense in his new article below, where he suggests that America "back-off in Syria," letting all the crazy Arabs and Turks just "fight it out" amongst themselves.]

The Arab collapse

Middle East a vulture’s feast

• By RALPH PETERS

Ralph Peters

The Arab Spring has unleashed the Arab Collapse. Everybody still standing in the region is picking the flesh of the helpless. The Islamist cancer proved more virulent than Arabs themselves expected, while dying regimes behave with unrestrained ruthlessness.

And our diplomats still think everyone can be cajoled into harmony.

We’re witnessing a titanic event, the crack-up of a long-tottering civilization. Arab societies grew so corrupt and stagnant that violent upheaval became inevitable. That’s what we’re seeing in Syria and Iraq — two names, one struggle — and will find elsewhere tomorrow.

ZUMAPRESS.com

The next country to go: Rescuers working at the site of a car bomb in Kirkuk, Iraq, last week. Violence is rising rapidly across the country.

We can’t stop it, we can’t fix it, and we don’t understand it. But we can stay out of it.

When the US is in the Middle East, the Arabs want us out. When we’re out, they want us in. But our purported Arab (and Turkish) allies consistently agree that Uncle Sam should pay the party bill, while they take home all the presents.

Yes, Syria’s humanitarian crisis is appalling. And no, I don’t like to see innocents dying or suffering. But the calls from the region for American action are nakedly cynical.

Turkey has the largest military in NATO after our own, but cries “helpless” crocodile tears over Syrian refugees — while dreaming of rebuilding the Ottoman Empire upon their ruined lives. Our Saudi “friends” spent decades building the most-sophisticated military arsenal in the Middle East, apart from Israel. Now the Saudis wring their hands over Syria’s misery — but won’t intervene directly to stop the killing.

The Saudi position is always “You and him fight!” As long ago as Desert Storm, Saudis joked about renting the American army and our bumpkin gullibility. (Try to find one US officer who’s worked with the Saudis and doesn’t hate their guts. . .) Now they want Washington to spend our blood and treasure to open the mosques of Damascus to their Wahhabi cult.

Well, the Assad regime is horrible, but not al Qaeda horrible. Better poison gas than poisoned religion, as far as our own security’s concerned. This is an Arab struggle (with Turkish and Iranian vultures overhead). This time, we need to let them fight it out.

The region’s outdated order is disintegrating. But Washington’s still mesmerized by the artificial boundaries on the map.

Nine decades ago, the diplomats at Versailles ignored the region’s natural fault lines as they carved up the Middle East, forcing enemies together and driving kin apart (while Woodrow Wilson turned his back on the Kurds). Only brute force and dictators kept up the fiction that these were countries. Now the grim charade has reached its end.

Iraq was carved out for British interests, while Syria was France’s consolation prize. Now Syria’s collapsing in a too-many-factions-to-count civil war. And Iraq’s in the early stages of its own dissolution; even a would-be dictator — another of our one-time “friends,” Nouri al-Maliki — can’t keep the “country” together.

We don’t even know how many new states will emerge from the old order’s wreckage. But the Scramble for the Sand is on, with Iran, Turkey, treacherous Arab oil sheikdoms and terrorists Sunni and Shia alike all determined to dictate the future, no matter the cost in other people’s blood.

We had our chance to extend the peace and keep both Iran and Wahhabi crazies at bay after we defeated Iraq’s insurgencies. But a new American president, elevating politics over strategy, walked away from Baghdad, handing Iraq to Iran. Now it’s too late. If George W. Bush helped trigger the Arab Spring, Barack Obama made this Arab Winter inevitable.

We must not be lured into the current fighting — centered, for now, on Syria — by cries of humanitarian necessity. The local powers could step in to stop the killing. But they won’t. Once again, they want us to pay the bill. (It’s time for the Saudis, especially, to give their own blood.)

We’ve paid enough. Rhetoric and red lines notwithstanding, we need to back off from Syria, if for no other reason than a strategist’s golden rule: If you don’t understand what a fight’s about, stay out.

Ralph Peters is the author of the new Civil War novel “Hell or Richmond.”

Non-Islamist Afghans Are Wary of Nawaz Sharif – Probably with Good Reason

Afghans are wary of Nawaz Sharif – but should they be?

By Dawood Azami BBC World Service

 

 

Nawaz Sharif’s victory in Pakistan’s general elections is being seen with some alarm in Afghanistan, where some fear it may mean more instability.

 

The fact that the Pakistani Taliban held off attacking Mr Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League (N), and the comments he made during the election campaign, reinforced the perception in Afghanistan that Nawaz Sharif is a “representative of the Pakistani establishment” which Afghans blame for most of their troubles.

 

Nawaz Sharif has suggested that Pakistan should end its support for the international alliance against terrorism and says he would talk to Pakistani militant groups.

 

Many Afghans fear he will make peace with the Pakistani Taliban, who will then stop carrying out attacks in Pakistan and focus solely on Afghanistan.

 

“Nawaz Sharif wants peace in Pakistan at the expense of stability in Afghanistan,” says Rahmatullah, a resident of the western Afghan province of Herat.

 

“He doesn’t want a stable and strong Afghanistan.”

History lesson

The roots of these concerns lie in the past.

 

Mr Sharif was very close to Pakistan’s former military ruler General Zia-ul-Haq, who was behind organising Afghan resistance to Soviet occupation in the 1980s. Both Gen Zia and Mr Sharif had close links with all seven Afghan mujahideen factions based in Pakistan.

 

This policy resulted in the fall of the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul in 1992.

 

As prime minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif was instrumental in forming the mujahideen government in Peshawar, before sending it over the border to take power in Kabul.

 

General Zia-ul-Haq (right) was behind organising Afghan resistance to Soviet occupation in the 1980s

 

Mr Sharif went to Kabul just a day after the mujahideen victory on 28 April 1992, the first and only foreign leader to visit.

 

Many in Afghanistan blame him for dismantling the Afghan security forces and fulfilling the mission of bringing Afghanistan into “Pakistan’s sphere of influence”.

 

In the run-up to Pakistani elections in October 1993, Nawaz Sharif’s party occasionally taunted its rival, the PPP of Benazir Bhutto, by using the slogan “you gave up Dhaka, we took Kabul”.

 

This was a reference to the PPP governing Pakistan when Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan) seceded in 1971, while it was under the PML that the Pakistan-based mujahideen leaders were installed in Kabul.

 

The Taliban emerged in Afghanistan when Benazir Bhutto was Pakistan’s prime minister. But it was Nawaz Sharif’s government that officially recognised the Taliban government in Kabul on 25 May 1997.

 

In addition, as prime minister Mr Sharif openly praised the Taliban and its policies in Afghanistan during his failed attempts to introduce Sharia law in Pakistan through a constitutional amendment in 1998.

 

Although the party was out of power for 14 years, it has kept the relationship alive with some Afghan stakeholders, including the Hezb-e-Islami of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the leader of a powerful mujahideen faction that is now part of the Afghan insurgency and whose representatives are engaged in on-off talks with the government in Kabul.

Future hopes

Afghan President Hamid Karzai was the first foreign leader to welcome Mr Sharif’s election. He praised Pakistan for holding general elections despite the violence.

 

In a phone conversation with Mr Sharif, President Karzai expressed his hope that relations between the two countries would improve with the sincere co-operation of Pakistan in the war on terrorism.

 

Nawaz Sharif met Afghan warlords and religious leaders at his residence during Afghan peace talks in 1993

 

Although the two leaders don’t have a personal relationship, they have a few things in common. Both are devout Muslims and both had a shared goal of ending the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

 

Afghan officials generally accuse Pakistan of sponsoring the Taliban in Afghanistan and have frequently asked Pakistan to dismantle what they call militant sanctuaries on its soil.

 

The Afghan government wants the new administration in Pakistan to formulate a clear policy towards brokering peace in Afghanistan by pressurising or convincing Taliban leaders, who Kabul says are all based in Pakistan.

 

Leaders of the PML (N) reject the pro-militant accusations made against the party.

 

“Afghanistan will feel the change that Pakistan now has a strong and popular government,” Sartaj Aziz, a member of the PML (N)’s powerful central executive committee and a former foreign minister during Mr Sharif’s second term, told the BBC.

 

“Bilateral relations will improve because we both have the same goal of achieving peace and the formation of a stable government [in Afghanistan] as a result of reaching some sort of reconciliation following the withdrawal of the US.”

Saudi role

Unlike President Asif Ali Zardari’s outgoing PPP government, which was trusted by neither the Pakistani army nor the Taliban, Nawaz Sharif has the potential to become a guarantor and mediator for peace talks.

 

He has already reached out to Pakistan’s arch-rival India and indicated that he wants to revive the peace process he undertook with Delhi when he was last in power.

 

Good relations between India and Pakistan will have a positive impact on the situation in Afghanistan, where India’s growing influence is viewed with concern in Islamabad.

 

Nawaz Sharif now has a mandate from the people of Pakistan and is respected and possibly feared by both the army and Afghan and Pakistani militant and religious groups.

 

In addition, he is also close to Saudi Arabia, one of only three countries (the other two being Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates) that recognised the Taliban when they were in power.

 

Saudi Arabia is still an important regional player and can influence Pakistan’s Afghan policy and play an effective role in brokering peace between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

 

All this puts Nawaz Sharif in a much better position than his predecessors to help curb militancy and bring long-awaited peace to both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

 

He says his top priority is the economy – for Pakistan to prosper he needs peace and stability not only in his own country but also in the neighbourhood.

 

But don’t expect change overnight – Pakistan’s powerful military is unlikely to cede Afghan policy easily to the new civilian administration.

World Opinion Turning Against Saudis/Qatar/American Sponsorship of International Terrorists Within Syria

UN General Assembly Vote Reflects Shift in Syrian Public Opinion

 

by FRANKLIN LAMB

 

Homs, Syria

It’s not hard to find critics of the Assad government in the Governorate (Muhafazat) of Homs or for that matter, to varying degrees in Syria’s other thirteen Governorates according to Syrian analysts interviewed by this observer and reports from human rights groups including lawyers representing dissidents in Syria. However, after nearly 27 months of turmoil, the public opinion pendulum is markedly shifting back in support of the current regime.

One international political result was registered at the United Nations this past week when a US-Qatari-Saudi drafted General Assembly Resolution that was designed to increase pressure on the Assad government stumbled badly and fell far short of what the Saudi Ambassador to the UN and other US allies predicted would be an overwhelming vote in favor.

Effect of shift in popular opinion in Syria

Over the past four or five months it has become increasingly clear that public opinion in Syria is shifting for reasons that include, but are not limited to the following:

While inflation at the grocery stores in probably the most common complaint heard from a cross-section of society here, the population is adapting somewhat to higher prices and it appears to credit the government for efforts, some successful, to soften the impact of the illegal US-led sanctions that target this same Syrian population for purely political reasons to achieve regime change.

While Syrians demand dignity and freedom from oppressive security forces and an end to corruption, as all people do in this region and beyond, they are witnessing a return to near normalcy with respect to supplies of electricity, benzene, mazout fuel oil, bus schedules, schools, and a host of public services such as garbage collection, street sweeping, park maintenance, and sympathetic traffic cops who are rather understanding of short-cuts taken by drivers and pedestrians due to “the situation”.

In addition, public service announcement and even text messages demonstrate that the government is aware of the degree of suffering among the population, accept partial blame, and are focusing on remedial measure and crucially, ending the crisis with its horrific bloodshed. One observes here a definite trend of the pulling together of a high percentage of Syrians who share a very unique history and culture and who are deeply connected to their country and who are increasingly repelled by the continuing killing from all sides including the recent barbarisms of body mutilations and summary executions videotaped and broadcast on Utube by jihadist elements. The latter who these days come from nearly three dozen countries, paid for and indoctrinated by enemies of Syria’s Arab nationalism and deep rooted pillar of resistance to the occupation of Palestine.

In addition, many among Syria’s 23 million citizens, who initially supported the uprising following government reaction to event in Deraa in March 2011, now have serious second thoughts about who exactly would replace the current government. Events in Syria are also making plain that the army is still loyal to the Assad government, and according to Jane’s Defense Weekly, is actually gaining experience and strength as well as the well-known fact that as western diplomats are admitting, the “opposition militias” are hopelessly fractured, turning one another, many essential mafia outfits, and beginning to resemble their fellow jihadists from Libya, Chechnya and in between.

Opinion in Damascus and surrounding areas visited this past week, confirms this observers experience the past five months of a sharp and fairly rapid shift in opinion that now strongly favors letting the Syrian people themselves decide, without outside interference, whether the Assad regime will stay, and indeed, whether, the Baathist party will continue to represent majority opinion, not through wanton violence but rather via next June’s election. Many express confidence in the run up to this critical vote, noting that the election will be closely monitored by the international community to assure fairness.

Perhaps aided by the current glorious May weather, a certain optimism, that was more scarce in the past, pervades many neighborhoods.

For different reasons, foreign powers, including the USA, Turkey, European Union, the UK Jordan and even the majority population of the six Gulf Cooperation Council family run countries, according to Pew Research, are shifting their earlier positions which were based in part of the US administration, NATO, and Israeli assurances that the Assad government would surely fall quickly, “A matter of days, not weeks” US President Obama promised. That was two years ago.

As noted above, this trend has accelerated since the UN General Assembly vote with last weeks which did not go as planned on the biased and politicized non-binding draft resolution on Syria.

The public reaction in Syria and across the Middle East is substantially that the “Friends of Syria” non-binding GA resolution contradicts the reality on the ground, backs terrorism in Syria and hinders the international efforts to help achieve a political solution to the crisis in this country. Only 107 states voted in favor of the resolution, 12 against while 59 countries, mostly from Africa and Latin America, abstained from voting.

One reason the vote fell short of the 130 favorable votes that the basically same resolution garnered the past two times is that it is widely viewed as ignoring the crimes and atrocities committed by the armed jihadist groups in Syria and the flow of thousands of international terrorists backed by the West, the Gulf states and Turkey who provide them with weapons and money. According to the Russian delegate, backed by several other speakers, “the resolutions ignores all the terrorists’ heinous crimes and denounces what it called the escalation of the attacks by the Syrian government”. Afterward one Latin American Permanent Representative told Inner City Press that the count would have been below 100 if not for some “last minute arm-twisting.” As it turned out, 15 countries didn’t vote at all, opting to “get coffee,” as one African Permanent Representative put it before the vote.

Syria’s Ambassador al-Jaafari exposes a hoax in the Gulf

Syria’s permanent Envoy to the UN Bashar al-Jaafari said his country regretted the adoption of a biased and unbalanced UN resolution, thanking the countries that rejected the resolution “for their responsible positions which support the UN principles and the international law articles”. He noted that the decrease in the number of countries that voted in favor and the increase of numbers of those who abstained from voting indicates the growing international understanding of the reality of what is happening in Syria due to the foreign interference, support of terrorism, the spread of extremism and incitement besides the refusal of dialogue.

“We rely on the UN and its member states to support Syria and its people against the culture of extremism and terrorism, and to encourage the comprehensive national dialogue to peacefully resolve the Syrian crisis.” he said. In a statement released after the vote on the UN draft resolution on Syria, al-Jaafari He said that the French delegation had foiled the issuance of a number of UN press releases to condemn the terrorist acts committed by al-Qaeda-linked armed groups in Syria which claimed the lives of thousands of Syrians as it foiled a UN release to condemn the attempt of assassination of the Syrian Premier.

After Qatar’s ambassador spoke in favor of the resolution his country drafted (and re-drafted several time), Ja’afari revealed that there existed an e-mail, from the representative of the Syrian opposition given to Syria’s embassy in Qatar, showing Qatar’s involvement in the kidnapping of UN peacekeepers by the Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade. He read out a phone number from the e-mail as several Gulf diplomats grimaced or scowled, and three left the Chamber.

Visibly stunned, the UK Permanent Representative Lyall Grant called the whole matter “deeply confusing”. Another Permanent Representative, from a militia contributing country, said that if true, it’s “very problematic.” The reasons include the fact that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had just thanked Qatar for its roles in the release of the UN Peacekeepers the earlier kidnapping of whom the Qatari government may have planned, paid for and executed.

Meanwhile, Ban Ki-moon’s spokesperson Martin Nesirky said he would not disclose any more about the “negotiations to free the peacekeepers or who was behind the crime.”

Score a major diplomatic victory for Syria’s UN Ambassador al-Jaafari as public opinion shifts in favor of the Assad government and both pressure as well as optimism build in the run-up to the Geneva II conference being organized by the White House and the Kremlin.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Syria and Lebanon and can be reached c/o fplamb@gmail.com

Vice and virtue police rule Syria rebel-held region

This undated image posted on a militant website purports to show militants in the al-Jazeera region on the Iraqi sid

Mona Alami, Special for USA TODAY

Religious police units enforce a strict form of Islamic rule, such banning alcohol sales and requiring conservative dress for women.

BEIRUT — Radical Syrian opposition groups now in control of Aleppo and much of its surroundings are forming increasing numbers of religious police units to enforce a strict form of Islamic rule, such as banning alcohol sales and making prayer compulsory.

The actions of these groups, many of which comprise foreign fighters, are gaining in reach in a country that has been largely secular and free of Islamic jihadist radicalism.

“Rebels have brutally imposed a conservative dress code for women and crushed any ( secular) opposition in these areas,” Syrian author Talal al-Atrache says.

Known as vice and virtue police, these squads are enforcing the edicts of courts put in place by rebels in the various Syrian regions where the Syrian government has been pushed out.

The main purpose of the courts is to adjudicate criminal allegations and issue rulings against members of regime forces or undisciplined members of the armed factions, says Mourad al Chami, spokesperson for the Syrian Military Council in Damascus.

“However, like in any other war, there have been reports of excessive behavior on the part of these religious courts and police squads,” al Chami admits.

Much of the spread of Islamic courts has been in Aleppo, the largest city in Syria and scene of nearly two years of battles between rebels and government forces. Fighters aligned with radical groups in Iraq and elsewhere have made their way there to fight the regime of Bashar Assad and at the same time have slowly been imposing their laws on villages and neighborhoods they control.

In some towns, Islamist militants patrol the streets and warn men to not shave and refrain from alcohol, and tell women to wear the abaya, a long black garment that comes with a veil.

“There have been several reports of liquor stores forced to close down,” says al Chami, who adds that most demands are limited to pockets of terrain and not widespread.

Mouaz al-Khatib, former head of the Syrian National Coalition, which is a group of opposition forces, has said he is aware of cases where women were executed for alleged sexual misbehavior, says Thomas Pierret, a specialist of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland.

Videos circulating on the Internet depict punishments imposed by vice and virtue squads in Syria, though the footage can not be verified as accurate.

One video shows a demonstrator being arrested because he had thrown away a banner inscribed with the Muslim declaration of faith associated with radical Salafi movements. Author al-Atrache says the demonstrator, identified as Wael Ibrahim Abu Mariam, is punished by 10 strokes of metal pipe by the Sharia Authority in Aleppo.

Another video shows secular activist Abdallah Yassine being charged for inciting unrest by Shariah Tribunals in Saraqeb, in the province of Idlib.

Pierret says he has seen no evidence of wide-scale and systematic enforcement of “Islamic virtue” in liberated areas. He says some of the vice and virtue committees were formed to establish dominance over rival Islamist groups rather than impose Islamic law on residents.

And the enforcement of Islamic law, or sharia, differs widely because of Syria’s diverse societies, says al Chami.

He says Islamist groups such Jabhat al-Nusra have been able to impose strict Islamic laws in some areas but not in others. They were unable to enforce a stricter interpretation of Islam in the suburbs of Damascus, such as in Reef Demashk, because of the population’s relative liberal views, he said.

In the areas where they have been successful, residents may have been swayed by the groups’ charitable help and offers of religious instruction rather than a genuine movement toward radicalism, al Chami says.

Moaz al Khatib, himself an Islamic scholar, has criticized al-Nusra for enforcing an uncompromising version of Islam. The Syrian National Council announced recently it intended to establish a more moderate version of sharia law, but what that means is not known.

“The reference to sharia ( by the council) means very little without further specification,” Pierret says.

The Root of All Saudi Anti-Women Violence Is the Belief That Women Are “Property”

“There is not one law in Saudi Arabia that regards violence toward women as an illegal activity”: what’s really behind Saudi’s domestic abuse problem?

via SyndiGate.info

Poster from Saudi Arabia’s first anti-domestic violence campaign

Saudi Arabia has introduced a campaign aimed at tackling domestic violence against women in the kingdom. The King Khalid Foundation funds the campaign, which is a royal, family-run organization with clear ties to the Saudi government.

The campaign ad portrays a face-covered woman with only her eyes showing, one of which is bruised. The translation of the Arabic message of the ad reads: “What is hidden underneath is much bigger.” However, the sentence should refer to what is hidden deep inside the laws of the kingdom and not under the facial covers.

The campaign is disconnected from the main reason behind domestic violence. Domestic violence in Saudi Arabia, unlike in other parts of the world, goes far deeper than just a social issue, it is the problem with the law itself. In Saudi Arabia, men grow up knowing that abusing your wife, sister or mother is protected by law. In terms of religion, men in Saudi Arabia, and some other parts of the Muslim world, are being taught in school that hitting your wife is one solution to her disobedience. Clerics are also outspoken about such rulings on TV.

The famous Saudi preacher Mohamad Alarefe, said on LBC channel:

“Allah created women with these soft and fragile bodies because they use their emotions more than their bodies and that’s why you find men discipline their wives with beating while women discipline their husbands with crying.”

He continued, “the point of the husband hitting his wife is not to cause pain but to get obedience.”

Clerics emphasize the fact the women have to obey their fathers, brothers and husbands as part of their religious duty.

On another occasion, when asked about women leaving the house, Mohamad Alarefe said:

“There are two cases for women leaving the house, the first case is if the husband told his wife not to go somewhere, like the market because he ‘hates’ her doing that and she leaves to that place then leaving is forbidden and not allowed. The second case is if she leaves to a place that her husband does not hate and approves of and that it was difficult for her to take his permission because he is in prison, or a captive, etc. then leaving is permitted.”

In terms of law, there is not one law in Saudi Arabia that regards violence toward women as an illegal activity. As a matter of fact, women in Saudi Arabia are minors under law until their death, making it impossible for a woman to make any decision on her own without the permission of her guardian.

This means that even if a woman is “radical” enough to disobey her guardian or reject his abuse or decisions, she has got nowhere to go. She cannot file a complaint or leave the country or do practically anything without her guardian’s permission, which in most cases, ironically, is the abuser himself.

Therefore there is no reason for a man to restrain himself from abusing women in his family. He knows that he has the power to abuse her, hit her, stop her from working and stop her from getting educated while having the law and religion right there behind him.

The ad in the new campaign is meant to define domestic violence in Saudi Arabia as being a social issue and divert attention from the government’s lack of laws that protect women. This campaign takes the responsibility away from the government and puts it in the hands of individuals themselves; women have to step up and talk about abuse and go to shelters, and men have to restrain themselves from abusing women.

This campaign tries to limit the cause to only being the women’s lack of knowledge of laws and regulations. It advocates the notion that the solution can only come by the participation of the women themselves. A comment by princess Ameerah al-Taweel’s, the vice chairwoman of the Board of the Alwaleed Bin Talal foundation, follows on a similar path:

“The main issue when it comes to abused women in Saudi is lack of knowledge. Some women who accept being abused don’t know their rights in Islam, and a lot of women who are suffering from abuse, don’t know their rights in our legal system. That they can report their case and they will be protected by the government.”

This notion presents the government as the “good guy” because supposedly they are promoting such campaigns and willing to help the women who suffer from abuse: a government that has “a legal system” that protects women from abuse and domestic violence.  The fact is under the legal system in Saudi, men can get away with their abuse, as the punishment for domestic violence is very minimal. Human Rights Watch World Report 2013 reported:

“In May, Jeddah’s Summary Court convicted a man for physically abusing his wife to the point of hospitalization, but sentenced him to learning by heart five parts of the Quran and 100 sayings of the Prophet Muhammad.”

The legal system in Saudi Arabia does not have the sufficient tools and laws that would deter men from domestic violence. In case of drugs and murder, the punishment is death penalty, which makes people think twice before committing such crimes because of the consequences.  Yet, when it comes to domestic violence the punishment is learning parts of the Quran and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad.

Such campaigns are ahead of their time because first concrete laws must be put in place. Then and only then can we start equating domestic violence to other social issues, such as drug use or child abuse or animal rights, that take place in the society despite the presence of related laws and regulations. How can we educate people about the harms of a social issue when the government itself is not considering these harms?

Women should refuse to be victimized into believing that such actions are part of their religion and instead ask for real changes in the law itself as opposed to superficially trying to solve such essential issues. They should hold their government accountable for this abuse. The solution to such problems can only be achieved with the kind of spirit and power that the Arab Spring had; by demanding change, protesting oppression and getting hurt for the sake of the cause.

 

By Mohamed Hemish

Israel Preparing New Syrian Airstrikes, Warns Assad Against Retaliation of Any Kind

[If, after all the stink that has been raised over the previous Israeli aggressions upon Syria in the midst of the US/Saudi war to destroy Syria, Israeli bombers attack again, and Assad fails to retaliate again, then it will prove some level of Israeli control over Assad (SEE: When the Hummus Hits the Fan, Israel Will Choose Bashar al-Assad Over Radical Islamists).  Such a Zionist revelation, coupled with recent news of an Israeli/Saudi alliance, will also reveal the true Patron/Client relationship between the Fascist Shit-hole and the Arab royal dictatorships, who have been the traditional alleged "protectors" of the rights of the Palestinian people.  The Mideast monarchies have given hope that one day they would avenge the "Nakba" ethnic-cleansing of Palestine by returning millions of refugees back to their rightful homes. 

Such is the nature of the "Bizarro world" that we live in. 

Good always turns-out to be evil in the end.  The power of weakness is a Christian delusion.  When we are meek before the enemies of the human race, then the most bloodthirsty criminals will determine the vile nature of the next step in the spiritual/psychological evolution of mankind.]

 

Report: Israel warns Assad not to retaliate to airstrikes

Israeli senior official tells New York Times Israel considering further military strikes on Syria to stop transfer of weapons to Hezbollah. ‘If Assad reacts, he will risk forfeiting his regime,’ he says

A senior Israeli official signaled on Wednesday that Israel was considering further military strikes on Syria to stop the transfer of advanced weapons to Islamic militants, and warned Syrian president Bashar Assad, that his government would face crippling consequences if it retaliated against Israel, the New York Times reported.

“Israel is determined to continue to prevent the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah . The transfer of such weapons to Hezbollah will destabilize and endanger the entire region,” the official said in an interview.

“If Syrian President Assad reacts by attacking Israel, or tries to strike Israel through his terrorist proxies,” the official said, “he will risk forfeiting his regime, for Israel will retaliate.”

The newspaper noted that the Israeli official has been briefed by high-level officials on the Syria situation in the past two days and had contacted The New York Times on Wednesday.

The paper considered the timing of the statements. “The precise motives for Israel’s warning were uncertain: Israel could be trying to restrain Syria’s behavior without undertaking further military action, or alerting other countries to another strike. That would ratchet up the tension in an already fraught situation in Syria,” the report said.

Foreign reports claim Israel carried out a total of three airstrikes in Syria since the civil war there began two years ago. The first allegedly took place in January when a convoy was bombed near the Syria-Lebanon border.

The target was reported to have been an arms shipment to Hezbollah that included Russian-made SA-17 missiles – possibly “game changing” weapons in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. Damascus later conceded there had been an attack claiming the target was a military research center in Jamraya.

The second airstrike allegedly occurred in early May and was reported by US media. The target was an arms shipment from Iran to Hezbollah. Another strike was reported 48 hours later. According to Syria, the Jamraya military center had been bombed again.

Israel did not comment on the reports.

Scowling Faces of the Defeated Fake “Islamists” That Should Make Normal Pakistanis Very Proud Today

Fazl rejects PTI mandate in KP

PESHAWAR: The Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (Fazl) has accused Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf of poll rigging in Mardan, Kohat, Peshawar and Fata and demanded re-election in the areas.

Addressing a press conference here on Tuesday, JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman warned of protests across Khyber Pakhtunkhwa if his demand was not accepted.

He said his party did not accept the PTI’s victory in Mardan, Kohat, Peshawar and Fata obtained through massive rigging.

He alleged that results had been changed in the areas and asked the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to take notice of irregularities and order re-election.

Raising doubts over the credibility of elections held across the country, he said the ECP’s failure to stop rigging had made the entire exercise controversial.

People, he said, had expected that the commission would conduct free, fair and impartial polls but they were disappointed.

Replying to a question, he said the JUI-F was in touch with the PML-N, Qaumi Watan Party, Jamaat-i-Islami and independents to explore the possibility of forming a coalition government in KP.

PTI’s response

Responding to the allegations, Asad Qaisar, president of the provincial chapter of PTI, has urged the JUI-F to respect the people’s mandate and sit in the opposition, instead of raising a hue and cry.

He said in a statement that Maulana Fazl had used the name of Islam only to grab power but he was rejected by the people who were aware of his motive.

He said the PTI had emerged as the party of the people under the dynamic leadership of Imran Khan.

He accused Maulana Fazl of accumulating wealth “in the name of Islam”, but the days of corrupt politicians were numbered. “Now people’s true representatives will rule the province.”

The Maulana, he said, cried foul whenever his party was rejected by people in an election.

The JUI-I chief had been baffled by the huge mandate of the PTI, he said, adding that party would form government in the province and serve the masses with dedication.

S-300 Air Defense Systems To Be Delivered To Syria “For Sure”—Putin

 

Russia digs in heels over Syria despite diplomatic push

AFP 

(Russia and the United States agreed to work to convene an international peace conference on Syria, a move UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi described as “the first hopeful news” from Syria in a long time.)

MOSCOW: Despite a flurry of diplomatic activity aiming to end a war that has claimed more than 80,000 lives, Russia still shows no signs of abandoning its support for the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

US Secretary of State John Kerry, British Prime Minister David Cameron and now Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have all found time to meet President Vladimir Putin in the last few days in a new effort to find an international consensus.

Russia and the United States agreed to work to convene an international peace conference on Syria, a move UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi described as “the first hopeful news” from Syria in a long time.

But in a sign of its refusal to line up with the West against Assad’s regime, Moscow has defied international calls to pledge to halt deliveries of advanced S-300 missile batteries to Syria.

Meanwhile it is far from certain that the conference, which Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said should ideally take place by the end of the month, can take place swiftly.

“If they don’t agree on the conference, its format and the time Assad should go, the casualties will carry on growing in huge numbers,” said Vladimir Akhmedov, a Middle East expert at the Institute of Oriental Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences.

“They would have to have Assad and his opponents at the negotiating table and they so far do not want to talk to him. There are lots of snags,” added Viktor Kremenyuk, deputy head of the Institute of USA and Canada.

Further complicating matters is the fact that the proposed conference would aim to build on an agreement reached by world powers in Geneva last June, which was never implemented, analysts said.

The agreement called for a cessation of violence and the establishment of a transitional government without ever spelling out Assad’s fate.

“It will be based on an idea that has failed. I doubt that the second conference will be more successful than the previous one,” said Akhmedov.

Russia and the West have been deeply divided over the war in Syria since its beginning in 2011.

Even though Moscow has stressed it does not support Assad personally, it maintains he has to be part of any negotiations over future of the country. In contrast, the West wants Assad out.

But recent claims of the use of chemical weapons by both sides, Israeli airstrikes on Syria and the multiplying casualty toll have spurred the uneasy partners into action.

In a bid to make another joint push for peace, Putin met Kerry for two and a half hours at the Kremlin on Tuesday and hosted Cameron for rare talks at his Black Sea vacation residence on Friday.

The next high-profile guest to call on Putin in Sochi is Netanyahu who will visit him Tuesday.

Netanyahu is widely expected to discuss supplies of weapons to Syria such as S-300 surface-to-air-missiles, amid concerns such a delivery would embolden the Damascus regime.

The sophisticated systems can defend against multiple aircraft and missiles and will complicate any foreign intervention.

While military analysts say it remains unclear whether the Kremlin will make good on its promise to deliver the arms, some suggest it is using the supplies as a bargaining chip in its talks with the West.

Opposition weekly The New Times, citing a source in London, said Monday the Russians had insisted in talks with Kerry that Moscow would fulfil its arms contracts with Syria.

The Kremlin will only revisit its decision if the West drops any plans it may have to “dismember Syria” by creating a buffer zone, the magazine said.

The Kommersant daily said Putin had told Cameron during talks that the S-300 systems would be delivered to Syria “for sure,” adding the contract in question was signed in 2010.

Britain and France have been leading a push to have the European Union’s embargo on supplying arms to Syria lifted, a move that could tip the balance of power in favour of rebels.

“Moscow is seeing that the West is getting fed up with the crisis and that it is determined to put an end to the Syrian mess,” said Kremenyuk.

One of the Terrorists That America Has Contracted To Fight Our “Humanitarian War” Against Syria

When the Hummus Hits the Fan, Israel Will Choose Bashar al-Assad Over Radical Islamists

Peter Chamberlin

Once again (just as in the recent US Embassy bombing in Ankara) a spectacular terrorist attack takes place in Turkey and the government immediately blames another obscure Marxist terrorist group, that they have conveniently resurrected from Turkey’s distant past.  The individual faction of this group has also allegedly been identified, as “Mirhac Ural,” who has recently been named by the Syrian opposition as the man behind the latest alleged “ethnic cleansing” in a town called Banias, along the Syrian coast (SEE:  Syria: Enter the ethnic cleanser of Banias).

Ural was originally a founding member of TPLP-C (Acilciler), a Marxist/Leftist/revolutionary group which was formed to fight US imperialism within Turkey, specifically, to act as a counter-force to US “Gladio”/”Gray Wolves” operations.  The TPLP-C supported its sister organization, the DHKP/C, which was blamed for the recent bombing outside the American Embassy in Ankara.

Ural is also a close friend of terrorist PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan.  He allegedly introduced Bashar al-Assad to Ocalan.  It was allegedly Ural who persuaded Assad to play the “Kurdish” card against Erdogan.  Erdogan thought that he had trumped this move when he negotiated the latest peace agreement with the PKK, until Iraq’s government refused to accept the expatriated Kurdish guerillas.  The Kurds cannot be blamed for using Syrian-based assets against Turkey in this terror bombing in Reyhanli over the denial of new sanctuary in northern Iraq, because the attack was clearly intended to help the Turkish Prime Minister to persuade Obama to intervene in Syria on Turkey’s behalf, and this would not help the Kurds in any conceivable way.

It is claimed in the Saudi/Arab press that Bashar Assad has become desperate in his resistance to the Imperial terrorist invasion, choosing at this time to gather his forces to him in the center of his Alawite home turf, as he ethnically cleansing Syria of the majority Sunnis.  They have reinforced this ethnic cleansing theme in the reports emerging from the Imperial press Turkish outfit, Zaman, about an alleged “Banias massacre.”  This massacre supposedly took place the day after Ural was quoted on YouTube, saying, “We need to cleanse Banias of traitors at the earliest.”

From the video, if it is genuine, it seems that Ural could be a legitimate leader of a Syrian counter-terrorist cell.  If that is true, then he would certainly have plenty of reasons to want to close the supply lines from Turkey.  But there is much more to this incident than this simple explanation.  If Ural is an anti-Islamist fighter, then why would he be immortalized in the Islamist press?  The story about an “Alevi rump state” along the coast of Syria, builds upon Sunni fears that they are about to also be ethnically cleansed from around Hatay, Turkey–Giving them a good reason to fight a sectarian war.  This benefits the Saudi-Israeli alliance, up unto the point where the destabilization plot it increases ethnic tensions on the wrong side of the border.  Proper conflict management prevents the various sub-plots from getting out of control and, as a consequence, over-driving the main destabilization plot and thereby, unintentionally causing the opposite effects, instead of the planned reactions.

Always, in these destabilization plots, there are two primary parties working the target–the destabilizing power and a patsy partner within the target entity (corporation, organization, state) that is to be destabilized.  Since the Saudis and Israel are obviously working together to carry-out the Imperial diktat for the Middle East, then it is clear that it is the Saudis who will eventually be the losing party.  Whether they will lose more than they can afford to pay is the risk that they are willing to take to eject Assad.  It is not in Israel’s interests to see an Islamist victory in Syria, but the Saudis and friends erroneously believe that it is in theirs.  It is unlikely that the Saudis would support an effort to divide Syria if it would harm Turkey, or make it harder to get weapons over the Syrian border to the terrorist front.

If the bombing of Turkey is clearly not in the Islamists’ interests, but does no harm to Israeli interests, then it may mean that Israel is using another PKK-related terror group to rein-in Prince Bandar’s Islamist attack dogs, in order to save Assad, in order to maintain the quagmire in Syria.  Consider the points raised in this piece from Zaman (SEE:  Opposition commander: Assad defeated, we are fighting Iran, Hezbollah).  The Gulenist mouthpiece Zaman interviews an alleged Syrian rebel commander,  of the al-Tawhid Brigade, Commander Abdulkader Saleh.  He makes the extraordinary claim that Israel and Iran are secretly working together against the Syrian terrorists:

“Bashar al-Assad’s regime does not have the strength to carry on its battle against opposition fighters, adding that Iran and Hezbollah are the forces behind the protracted war….Iran and Hezbollah are the ones who are continuing the war in Syria,”  

“Furthermore, Iran and Hezbollah are cooperating with Israel to be able to support Assad. Assad has protected Israel’s border for 40 years,”

“The opposition was going to take over arms, so Israel attacked. There is evidence pointing to this. There were some high-ranking officers with whom [the opposition forces] got into contact. [Those officers] were going to defect from [the Assad administration], handing over arms to the opposition. Israel hit these posts in fear that the opposition would take over the arms. The arms included heavy artillery as well as air defense systems. This assault, of course, was intended to support the Assad administration,” Saleh explained.

The first time I read the Saleh interview, I laughed it all off as nonsense, until I read the article in Foreign Affairs magazine, written by former head of Mossad, Efraim Halevy (1998 to 2002).  He affirmed to the world that Bashar Assad is Israel’s Man in Damascus (or “Why Jerusalem Doesn’t Want the Assad Regime to Fall”).

It is obviously in Israel’s interests to preserve the Assad dynasty, as opposed to the radical, unpredictable Islamists.  It may be impossible to determine the truth about Israeli conniving with Arab leaders until someone makes a big messy mistake.  If there were any honest news sources in the Middle East, then maybe we could figure-out just exactly who has benefitted from Israel’s latest bombings of Syria.  Would the Zionist state really have committed an “act of war” against Syria and Lebanon, just to prevent Hezbollah forces from upgrading a few of their missiles?  Was the Syrian military or government informant/traitor warning Israel about the imminent acquisition of “game-changing weapons” by Hezbollah, or by the Free Syrian Army?

If all of this proves to be true, that Israeli bombers were destroying heavy weapons and killing a lot of Syrian soldiers, in order to keep the weapons out of the hands of Syria’s terrorists, or that Mossad manipulated PKK-related killers to murder more than 40 innocent people in Reyhanli, then what does that say to the rest of the world, which is drowning in despair over the Syrian conflict?   What advantage is there in a Saud/Israeli alliance, when the Israelis are there to play the part of “spoiler” to all of the Islamist plans?  Above all else, Mossad/Israeli objectives are constant and unwavering, to establish Jewish dominance over every square inch of the Middle East, as a stepping stone to Jewish world dominance.  This justifies the spoiler role for Israel, support the Goyim’s plans, until the advantage shifts to Jewish interests, at which time all partners are double-crossed.  

the Saudi Gazette (SEE: Israel’s strategy in Syria ).

“But the bigger threat to Israel is the growth of democracy in the Arab world. If the Arab world were ever to become a democracy, it would expose Israel as the democracy fraud that it is.

Israel fears the Arab Spring because the Arab Spring augments the voices of freedom and calls for freedom throughout the region, not just in the Arab world, but in Israel too. And Israel is one of the most oppressive country’s in the Middle East. Although most Jewish citizens of Israel enjoy unprecedented freedoms and benefits from the state, non-Jews suffer simply because they are non-Jews. Christian Arabs and Muslim Arabs are victimized by Israel both as so-called “citizens” and as imprisoned victims in the occupied lands.”

If the Syrian terrorist forces have suffered devastating losses because of Israeli actions, then they will know the truth–That they have just been attacked by “friendly” forces allied to the Arabs and to the West….This can be expected to be reflected in the spirit of the anti-Assad forces and in their communiques to the outside world.  If they have been demoralized by these betrayals, then they can be expected to show that in subtle ways.  Their positive response to Western calls for an international Syrian peace conference, to be organized jointly by the US and Russia, may be just such a sign.

“Syria’s opposition will consult with backers Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey before it decides whether to take part in a peace conference proposed by the United States and Russia, its acting chief said Monday.”  Syria opposition to consult backers on peace talks.  This is a complete reversal to all previous dismissals of negotiations with Assad out of hand.  Such a conference confirms Obama’s complete reticence in expanding the Syrian conflict into a regional war.  If Erdogan was hoping that the terror bombings in Turkey would sway Obama’s opinion about bringing-in American or NATO support against Syria, then he is likely to be disappointed when they meet in DC this week.

As far as the possibility that Turkey will escalate the confrontation with Syria on its own (SEE: Turkey says it won’t be drawn into Syria conflct), there is very little chance that Erdogan will make this misstep, especially when he cannot really be certain exactly who is on his side.

therearenosunglasses@hotmail.com

Analysis: Pakistan army tries to win over population in war-torn tribal region

[Kayani's Islamists are faithfully intimidating the voting public, hoping to scuttle ideas of civilian government in Pakistan.   I look for the Army to flex its muscles somewhere, today, in order to remind Pakistanis just who protects them from the savages.  (SEE:  Obama’s Practical Joke On Gen. Kayani–”Quick Impact Projects” Don’t Repopulate Ghost Towns)]

 

With improvements to standard of living, residents slowly returning after years as refugees

By Rebecca Santana, Associated Press

A Pakistani displaced girl, Amina Bibi, attends class March 28, 2013, at a school rebuilt by the Pakistani army, in Tank, the bordering town of South Waziristan, the tribal area bordering Afghanistan attends. After battling Taliban militants in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan for over a decade, the Pakistani military is engaged in a new fight, for the hearts and minds of the people who are returning to the region after living for years as refugees.

Photograph by: B.K. Bangash , AP

SARAROGHA, Pakistan — Driving through high mountain passes with mud brick houses perched on cliffs overhead and caves below where Taliban fighters once hid, Brig. Hassan Hayat talks excitedly about the Pakistan army’s latest operations in these long-hostile tribal areas.

“Now we are getting into the olives,” he said as the road passed through groves of trees, explaining how the military has been bringing in Italian olive trees to graft on to local growers’ trees to improve production. “Some 400 trees we’ve already done.”

He had wanted to plant daffodils, he mentioned at another point in the trip but it turned out the flowers would be too hard to export. Bee farms have proven more productive.

After battling Taliban militants in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan for over a decade, the Pakistani military is engaged in a new fight, aiming to win over a population that is are returning to homes after years living as refugees in their country and who harbour a longstanding mistrust of the central government.

The military is rebuilding infrastructure and establishing economic and job projects for the population in South Waziristan, one of the seven tribal regions along the border with Afghanistan. It’s a classic counterinsurgency tactic similar to that used by the U.S. military — with mixed results — in Iraq and Afghanistan. The aim is to decrease support for militants and bring peace to a troubled region; in this case, it’s tribal areas that have long been sanctuaries for the Taliban and other militant groups fueling instability in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Once the people are more aware, more educated, they will not take arms but go for the development and be a positive contributor in society,” Hayat said.

With a month to go before nationwide elections that will likely include a transfer of power from one elected government to another for the first time in Pakistan’s history, security will be a major campaign issue. Since many of Pakistan’s security problems are linked to what happens in the tribal regions, the success or failure of the counter-insurgency campaign could have major repercussions for the rest of the country.

Pakistan’s battle against the Taliban began after the U.S. invasion of neighbouring Afghanistan in 2001, which pushed many militants across the border into the tribal regions of northwestern Pakistan. There, they found allies among a population historically neglected by Pakistan’s central government. Much of the population is Pashtun, the ethnic group that has been the backbone of the Taliban. Working out of the tribal areas, the Pakistani branch of the Taliban launched a campaign of attacks inside Pakistan.

South Waziristan became the main sanctuary for the Pakistani Taliban, until the army launched a large ground invasion in late 2009. Amid the assault, some 300,000 of the territory’s 545,000 people fled to other parts of Pakistan. Entire villages and towns were left virtually empty, particularly in the eastern part of the territory where fighting was heaviest. But the offensive largely broke the Taliban hold, with many fighters who survived going into hiding or fleeing into Afghanistan or the neighbouring Pakistani territory of North Waziristan, which remains a militant stronghold.

“The population was hostage to these people,” said Hayat. “They had their rule of law. Whatever they wanted they could do in this area.”

But many residents have a softer recollection of Taliban rule. Many said they didn’t have a problem with the Taliban and only fled because of the fighting.

“During the Taliban time the situation was good generally. The Taliban have not done anything wrong to anyone. Pakistan and Taliban have the problem,” said Sami Ullah, who owns a hotel and restaurant that opened in March in Sararogha, thanks to the army’s rehabilitation efforts.

The army, which essentially runs South Waziristan now, launched the rehabilitation and rebuilding program in 2010. It has grown since, mostly in the eastern part of the territory.

But major challenges remain. Only about 15 per cent of residents who fled have been allowed to return, as the military lets them back only at the rate their towns are rebuilt.

Many of those who have returned complain about lack of compensation and services. They chafe against military restrictions. The army, for example, has stopped mobile phone services, likely to prevent the Taliban from using them to communicate or detonate bombs. No one is allowed to carry weapons, angering tribesmen who consider their rifles a symbol of independence and pride. Anyone entering or leaving South Waziristan is checked against a database of who is allowed in and who is not.

It’s also unknown when, if ever, the military will be able to hand over power to a civilian government in South Waziristan, a territory about the size of Delaware.

“The progress is slow,” said Abdur Rahim Khan, who is running in the May 11 election for a parliament seat in a South Waziristan district. His village has not yet been resettled and most of his potential constituents are scattered around the country.

One of the military’s most high-profile projects is the roads being built in areas previously only accessible by four-wheel drive, camel or on foot. The U.S. government’s development arm is paying for most of the roads. Part of the plan is to open a new corridor to give traders easy access from Afghanistan to Pakistan’s central Punjab province, the heart of the country’s agriculture and manufacturing.

In Sararogha, businessman Danet Khan said the new roads save time and money. On the gravel roads, the average vehicle only survived four or five years. Now the smooth two-lane highway through his village cuts travel time dramatically.

The military has built shopping areas where villagers now sell goods out of small shop fronts with roll-down metal doors painted with a green and white Pakistani flag. A barber — something forbidden under the Taliban — cuts hair in one of the stalls, although he says most residents don’t need a shave because they still prefer long beards. Hayat would like to bring in a CD shop, also banned by the Taliban.

Soccer fields, schools, poultry farms and homes for widows have been built, and the military is trying to rehabilitate a leather factory sacked by the Taliban.

With few jobs at home, families here have historically survived on wages from family members sent to work in the port city of Karachi or the Persian Gulf. So the army built a vocational school to teach men skills such as computers and electricity repair. Since many people also joined the militants simply because they paid well, the school potentially deprives the Taliban of new recruits.

“They don’t have any opportunities. They need something to live on. That’s why they joined the Taliban,” said one student studying to be an electrician, Sajjad Ahmed.

A cadet college run by Pakistani military officers was provided after requests from residents who have been starved of quality schools and plagued by an absence of decent teachers.

In the long term, the future of the region will be influenced in large part by what happens in Afghanistan. American troops are scheduled to leave at the end of 2014. Pakistani military officials worry about a repeat of the civil war that followed the 1989 withdrawal of Soviet forces.

The final goal of handing South Waziristan to a civilian government is a long way off.

“Right now we feel safe as long as the army is around, but I am not sure about the future,” said resident Malik Fareed Khan.

The tribal areas, known as agencies, have historically been regarded as a security buffer between Afghanistan and the rest of Pakistan, administered mostly by government officials appointed by Islamabad and following a different legal system from the rest of the country. That system left a legacy of neglect and a feeling among residents that they don’t answer to the central government.

But for real stability, the tribal areas need to be better connected with the rest of Pakistan.

“The military is playing its role but you need to answer those questions to be successful in bringing total peace,” said Hayat.

UAE Charges 94 Protesters With Belonging To Wrong “Islamist” Outfit

UAE coup plot suspects seek independent probe into abuse claims

Associated Press

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates –  A group of 94 suspects charged with plotting against the United Arab Emirates is seeking an independent investigation into their claims of abuses in custody.

Their letter to the UAE’s president, released by activists on Thursday, comes after the prosecution wrapped up its case this week, claiming the Emirati suspects are linked to Islamist networks opposed to the country’s Western-backed ruling system.

The charges reflect wider crackdowns across the Gulf Arab states.

The letter repeats claims of torture and harassment of their families. It says their Islamic society, known as Al-Islah, had the backing of UAE leaders in the past and is loyal to the UAE’s leadership.

It urged for an independent probe and to “hold accountable” police and others.

A verdict in the trial is expected later this month.

Israel’s Secret Alliance with The Persian Gulf’s Arab States Against Iran

• ayatoilet1

Since Saddam Hussein’s Invasion of Kuwait, GCC states have collectively established a strong alliance with Israel. This alliance is currently focused on the destruction of Iran and the elimination of Iranian influence throughout the Middle East (and Central Asia). Both Israel and GCC countries are scared livid of the Iranian regime, its influence in their states and are therefore necessarily committed to this common goal. But this is a strategic mistake – for both GCC states and Israel. They have confused Iran’s regime with ordinary Iranians. Their beef is with the Mullahs NOT Iranians. This is a strategic blunder.

The Palestinian Factor

For decades Israel and the ‘whole’ Arab world were blood enemies.  Arab league members provided over $250 Million in funds to support the Palestinians since the ‘60s, and successfully organized an embargo with their oil supplies in the 1970’s to place pressure on Israel (and its allies: US and Europe).

But, in 1990, there was a tidal shift in alliances. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, Yasser Arafat (then PLO Chairman) came out and publicly supported Hussein; and Kuwait’s Palestinian population rose in support of the Iraqis during the invasion.  And not long after the U.S. led liberation, the Kuwaitis expelled 450,000 Palestinians.  The Palestinian population in these booming Persian “Gulf Arab” states has now dwindled by about 90% since 1990, replaced by Pakistanis and Filipinos.

Kuwait’s allies: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and other Persian Gulf Monarchs or Sheikhdoms or dictators (depending on your point of view) have rationalized that Palestinians were and still are a national security risk and should not be trusted – nor supported.

Payback against Saddam Hussein did not take long. Ironically, Saddam Hussein who was once supported to the tune of billions of dollars by these same states in his war with Iran was also in their cross hairs. And within a decade, or so the U.S. stationed itself in Qatar, and transported troops through Kuwait to decimate his regime. Hussein had not only failed to follow to destroy Iran, but had turned against them!

In politics it seems – the enemy of my enemy is my friend!  In fact, the opening with Israel came on the heels of the Madrid Conference in 1991 that contributed to the countries’ official, rapprochement with Israel. Most of the ‘brokerage’ in these relationships has developed through close relations with Jewish organizations in the United States. There is now an odd sense of solidarity arising out of the knowledge that Iraqi Scud missiles had fallen on both Riyadh and Tel Aviv.

In 1994, the GCC canceled its boycott of companies and countries that maintained economic ties with Israel. In 2005 the same Gulf States announced normalization measures with Israel. The Bahraini foreign minister confirmed that his country had decided to cancel the boycott of Israeli goods, and the Qatari foreign minister called on Arab nations “to respond positively to the step taken by Israel.” He noted that “full diplomatic relations between Qatar and Israel may be possible even before a comprehensive Israeli withdrawal from the territories.”

And while this decade long strategic shift was occurring, the British government sold its stake in BP basically to a combination of Jewish Bankers (Rothschilds Holdings 39%) and Gulf State Investment Organizations like for example the Kuwait Investment Organization  (21.6% by 2005). BP now, is basically an arm of these states, while employing and banking primarily British executives and banks.

And Israel’s government, for its part is enabling Israeli companies to indirectly contribute to the security of these dictatorships through training of local armed forces and by offering advanced (homeland security-related) advanced products, as long as they are perceived not to harm Israel’s strategic competitive advantage. Israel already has access to markets in the Gulf; the boycott is not applied if the products do not carry an Israeli label.

Israel’s covert relations with the United Arab Emirates were partially exposed by the late-November 2010 leak of diplomatic cables by the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks that uncovered the “secret and persistent dialogue” between the two countries.

There are numerous formal and informal visits between the nations (and with Turkey among the crowd). Whether or not there are formal relations, i.e. embassies, it’s very clear that there is a strong alliance in place. Israelis and Sheikhdoms are ONE.

The Iran Factor

Iran’s Mullahs have long been an adversary to these Arab dictators. It is not clear why? It is true that Shiites comprise the majority of the populations in most of this region – including Saudi Arabia’s oil rich Eastern provinces. Democratic reforms, in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain …you name it…would result in Shiite led majorities, just like Iraq. There is real fear in these ruling Arab elites when it comes to ‘democratic reforms’.  But what exactly the Mullahs did to deserve this status is unclear? Yes, Iran did bomb Kuwaiti tankers – but that was during the war when Kuwait was exporting Iraqi oil…and Iraq had just bombed Iranian oil installations. And okay, there is a territorial dispute over islands in the Persian Gulf. So what??

What is strange for me is that there is frequent intermarriage, migration, bilingualism, and commerce between Iranians and many of these GCC states and citizens. Indeed besides the indigenous Shiite populations in the states around the Persian Gulf, there are over 400,000 Iranians residing in places like Dubai, roughly one third of its urban population…performing core functions in the area. Iranians, (the people of Iran), are a huge regional asset.

Despite all this, in recent years what has tied the Gulf states to Israel more than anything else is their ever-growing mutual fear of Iran. Israel today, represents the enemy of not only the Palestinians but also Iran’s Mullahs. An alliance between these “(Persian) Gulf Arab” states and Israel has been established with a clear objective of undermining Iranian influence and “suppressing” Palestinian ambitions.

According to Wikileaks published US State Department cable, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, repeatedly implored Washington to target the Iranian nuclear sites—in his words: to “cut off the head of the snake while there was still time.”

It is an open secret that these Gulf countries maintain contacts with Israel—mainly through the sharing of intelligence. In the summer of 2010 it was again reported (although the reliability of these claims is uncertain) that Saudi Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs V : 1 (2011)   Arabia would allow Israeli warplanes to use its airspace in the event of an attack on Iran’s nuclear sites. Israeli military gear was even delivered to Saudi Arabia in preparation for an eventual attack on Iran.

Sami al Faraj, president of the Kuwait Center for Strategic Studies and a consultant to Kuwait and other GCC states, said recently that the “GCC states have been engaged in consultations and intelligence exchange with Israel, particularly regarding the Iranian threat.” Indeed, in the eyes of Arab rulers of the Gulf, it may seem that Israel can be vital to Gulf security, as the US is now leaving Iraq and Afghanistan.

Containing Iran’s quest for what is viewed as a ‘hegemonic role’ in the Persian Gulf is the main concern of the Arab monarchies, committed as they are to the preservation of their regimes. After the Islamic Revolution, terror and subversion became Tehran’s primary means of enforcing its regional policy and boosting its influence. In most cases, as with the covert Iranian “sleeper cell” uncovered in Kuwait (with links to Bahrain) in April 2010, it was hard to prove Iranian involvement; thus, Iran can deny any connection to such activity, while maintaining open diplomatic relations with the Gulf states it is covertly targeting.

On the one hand, the Mullahs have conveyed that they see themselves as partners for all Gulf States. On the other, their actions have been hardly reassuring on the western side of the Gulf. Iran has questioned the legitimacy of regimes, explicitly threatened to shut the straits of Hormuz, and to target strategic facilities in the Gulf States. It has conducted ominous military maneuvers and played a negative role in events in Iraq and Yemen. Moreover, Iran has occupied what the GCC consider to be their land (Abu Musa and the Tunb Islands). The Mullahs even went so far as to declare Bahrain as the fourteenth district of Iran (reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s rhetoric regarding Kuwait).

For their part, the GCC governments recognize the difficulties facing the international community in stopping Iran on its way to nuclear weapons capability and want to avoid angering their increasingly powerful neighbor—and prefer to do what is necessary behind the scenes – indirectly if you will. Netenyahu’s brazen verbal attack on Iran is heralded by its ‘tacit allies’ and further amplified on Qatar’s Al Jazeera TV throughout the Middle East during peak viewing periods.

There is a genuine concern that an Iranian bomb will enable the Mullahs to set the future political, economic, and strategic agenda in the region. Similar concerns stem from the possible outcome of an Israeli and/or American military operation aimed at thwarting Iran’s nuclear capability, namely, a massive and widespread Iranian retaliation. Although GCC countries support a ‘comprehensive’ diplomatic solution to the crisis with Iran, they fear it will be at the expense of their interests and result in American recognition of Iran’s dominance in the Gulf.

Today’s Proxy Wars

In the absence of an overt war, Israel and its Arab allies have decided to fight Iran’s mullahs by proxy. The overall plan is to ‘contain’ Iran – i.e. surround Iran while ensuring Iran’s economy is held back with sanctioning. This is a systematic policy of weakening Iran and sucking Iranian blood. Meanwhile, of course they (and their surrogates) are running off with Iran’s treasure in the Caspian Sea and limiting Iranian oil and gas exports in favor of their own exports. In addition, sanctions have served to enable GCC countries to act as trading points for ‘sanction busting’ – reselling sanctioned goods to Iran at inflated prices and essentially profiting from Iran’s demise.

Interestingly, Israel and GCC states enjoy excellent relations with Azerbaijan. And BP, their joint prime investment vehicle, owns (and operates) the key oil pipeline across Azerbaijan and is the major operator of oil and gas platforms in the Caspian Sea (in what is actually Iranian water).

It is reported that Israel has a number of air bases inside Azerbaijan, with fighter jets ready for orders to attack Iran at any time. Azerbaijan now also is tacitly supporting Azeri separatists inside Iran.

GCC states have begun funding Al-Ahwazi separatists and Jundallah (Baluchi) separatists. While Israel too, has been funding Kurdish separatists.

But the clearest expression of this proxy effort is in Syria. I will grant you that the Syrian affair is much more than a proxy fight with Iran. Yes, both Israel and GCC states (like Qatar) have a clear objective of running major gas pipelines across Syria (and Lebanon too) to the Turkey to export their newly discovered resources. And yes, Turkey too has partnered with them and built the Nabucco pipeline to Europe with 40% excess capacity with this objective in mind.

What apparently started as a legitimate attempt to join the Arab spring and fight for democratic rights in Syria has transpired into a mercenary led ‘civil war’, with considerable entry of ‘foreign fighters’ in the fray. The Syrian government recently handed a list of names of citizens from 19 countries accused of joining Syria’s rebels: Afghanistan, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Chad, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Turkey, Yemen and Chechnya. Since Chechnya is not a country, but a republic of the Russian Federation, the list likely contains names of Russian citizens…too. According to CNN reports, the strangest part of all of these fighters is that Jabhat al-Nusra — the radical Islamic group that has become the opposition’s best fighting force. The lead author of a new analysis of the group, which is backed by al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), told CNN that al-Nusra now has 5,000 fighters and is willing to watch Syria burn to secure an al-Qaeda foothold in the region!

In July, Dutch photo journalist Jeroen Oerlemans and British photographer John Cantlie were captured and held hostage in Syria for a week by rebel militants. They claimed that several of their captors spoke English with recognizable regional British accents, like Birmingham and London. And in August, Syrian rebel commanders reportedly became concerned over the numbers of hardline Islamists entering Syria from other Muslim-majority countries.

Beyond these proxy wars, there is clear indication that a direct war may in fact be in the cards. This past year, both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have opened new pipelines bypassing the Strait of Hormuz.  The new links more than double the total pipeline capacity bypassing the strait to 6.5m barrels a day, or about 40 per cent of the 17m b/d that transits Hormuz. GCC states are clearly preparing for a conflict, although their preparations are NOT yet complete. Interestingly, Iraq too has a pipeline across Saudi Arabia to al Muajiz on the Red Sea to deliver its oil and by pass the Persian Gulf. One fascinating fact is that Saudi Arabia’s Al Muajiz Port on the Red Sea was developed for a total shipping capacity of 10 Million barrels a day!

A Major Strategic Blunder

The problem with this complete strategic realignment is that core populations of these GCC states are inherently pan-Arabist. Which means that once the ‘people’ of these states figure out that there is an ‘overt’ realignment between their leaders and Israel, there is the potential for a massive back-clash domestically. This could be further fueled by natural ‘Arab Spring” type democratic yearnings among the populations of these GCC states – and not only might there be a massive shift in government in the GCC states, but Israel too risks losing partners that it has invested heavily in.

Secondly, an overt war with Iran would only accelerate the demise of these regimes – not sustain them. The deal so far with their suppressed populations has been to exchange economic gains for political gains. If war breaks out there will naturally be rationing and military drafts. This sort of instability will only make them further vulnerable.

Thirdly, I believe a calculation that makes Iran their enemy is fundamentally flawed. The Mullahs in Tehran do not represent Iran or Iranians. In fact the Mullahs in Iran are enemies of Iranians too. In fact most Iranians see the Mullahs as ‘Arabs’ i.e. imposed on Iran; and indeed many senior regime leaders were born in Iraq – not even Iran.

These sheikhs need to remember that Iran’s current role in the region is a derivative of wars ‘started’ by GCC states – not Iranian aggression.  Remember, Saddam Hussein invaded Iran – with support, encouragement and financial backing from GCC states. The minutes of his meetings with King Fahd in Egypt is now public record. The loan balances Iraq had to GCC states is also public record that came out as a result of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. You can’t hide it. And any insecurity these monarchs feel from the legitimate demands of their populations should NOT be confused with Iranian meddling.  Iranians have become a scapegoat – when the real problems are elsewhere. Iranians did NOT put the Mullahs in power – the West did. That is public record too.

Fourthly, Iran (especially after the war with Iraq and two neighboring wars) has now developed a formidable defense establishment, and its own (in house) weapon systems. This strategic posture cold provoke an outright war, and just like the war with Iraq – there is a real possibility that the GCC states could come out on the short end of their own stick. After two years of a proxy war versus Iran in Syria, there is no clear conclusion. Assad remains in power. The joint Israeli/GCC/Turkey plan is to then extend the war to Lebanon and then Iran. But what if the GCC states get ‘stuck’ in Syria? Have they succeeded? Will the west come to the rescue again? Or let’s put it another way, is there a vital strategic interest in Syria that the U.S. must defend? Will the U.S. risk bankruptcy for Syria? I doubt it.

The truth is, that while this all seemed like a good idea (and everyone was angry at Saddam Hussein the Palestinians) it may not be a great idea today. Once one domino starts to fall through a public uprising for democracy – with ‘no’ push from Iran (May I add, there are many radical actors in the Middle East – Hamas, Hizbullah, al Qaeda, you name it…) – in any single one of these GCC countries, all these Sheikhs, or Monarchs or Dictators could all fall. This is something they need to learn from the former “Shah of Iran” – who had grandiose strategic ideas but did not establish a strong domestic political infrastructure that was vitally necessary to carry out his ambitions.  The Sheikhs need to understand that they can do NOTHING without the heartfelt support of their citizens.

These GCC countries need to understand what their core strategic interest is. Does Iran represent a strategic threat? If so, why? And does that mean that GCC states need to align with Israel?

I would argue that it is in the “world’s” national interest to topple the regime in Iran – but not do anything to alienate the people of Iran or cause division among Iranians. That to the extent GCC states can be aligned with Israel or indeed any other country (Indonesia, Brazil etc.) to topple the regime in Tehran – that this would a fundamental strategic win for everyone. But beyond that any permanent alliance with Israel will be counterproductive to their interests and stability. This is not meant as a negative statement about Israel, it’s just a strategic reality. Israel has nothing to offer these regimes except exposure to radical forces. (Look at who they are partnering with in Syria?) And in fact Qatar could have pumped its natural gas across Syria – even without a proxy war in Syria or the balkanization of Syria, or the death of 60,000 Syrians. When the dust settles on all this, it will not be pretty. There were other ways to bring democracy to Syria without arming these sorts of rebels and radicals.

In fact, the most vital strategic ally every GCC state can have is a transformed Iranian government – their neighbor – that can police the neighborhood with them and help them make democratic transitions without a great deal of pain. Petty fights over small deserted islands, or sectarian considerations should not distract quality strategic thinking. Iran can offer them a huge market, can offer them regional stability, and also access to even bigger markets in Central Asia. Israel on the other hand is a strategic liability. So what if the Jewish lobby in Europe or the U.S. is helping them get access to cable TV distribution, and helping them buy soccer (football) teams – how is that of value to the people (the actual citizens) of GCC states? The Sheikhs are being shaked down for cash, buying over-priced assets.  There is no real strategic, sustainable gain in getting VIP seats to major games.

It is true that before the West toppled the Shah, Britain persuaded America to align strategically with it and invest in Alaskan Oil while Britain exploited North Sea oil – both of which were expensive to extract, AND needed sustained high oil prices. Toppling the Shah also meant shutting off Iran’s exports for over 10 years! Today, America is being ‘pushed’ into becoming an energy ‘power house’ with net energy exports for the first time in over 30 years. But it is a mistake to believe that this will result in a strategic realignment. The Obama administration so far has refused to ‘play’ in Syria in concert with Israel, Turkey or the GCC. And the Obama administration is focused on ‘reducing imports’ NOT maximizing exports i.e. reducing America’s oil dependency. The GCC is mistaken if they believe “Saudi-Americanization” will shift U.S. policy. And if the GCC are really shrewd, they will notice that in fact the U.S. has been protecting Iran’s Mullahs – not undermining them…and vice-a-versa. Iran today lists Iraq and Afghanistan as major export clients (both dominated by the U.S. military, while apparently there are global sanctions on Iran). The Mullahs are an expression of U.S. foreign policy.

What do these Sheikhs really have to show for all the money they have invested in the West? Indeed, governments in the West view them as great candidates for hosing, and use all these opportunities to sell the Sheikhs billions of dollars of inflated priced arms – and junk government bonds to undermine their own domestic spending. They are being hosed. They are the ones being used…by Israel and the West!

And they have to face it, democratic yearnings in the region are unstoppable. The Mullahs will fall, and their dictatorships are at risk (and it is not because of Iran). These dictators can become Monarchs like the Queen of England – even if there are a ton of Catholics in Britain!

There is a better path to peace, stability and prosperity – they need to see it – but their strategic calculations are completely wrong.

Zio-Qatari Sheikh Wants To Set-Up Shop In Israel

Qatari Sheikh Said to Want to Visit Israel on Business

By Joshua Mitnick

Eyebrows went up in Israel’s business community this week when a prominent Israeli business leader said that a top Qatari businessman and member of the royal family is mulling a visit to Jerusalem later this year to boost Israeli-Palestinian commercial ties.

Sheikh Khalifa bin Jassim Al Thani, who heads the Qatar Chamber of Commerce and Industry and is a staunch ally of Emir Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, said he wants to attend the inauguration of an arbitration court for businesses disputes between Israelis and Palestinians, according to Oren Shachor, the head of the Israeli Chamber of Commerce and a former general in the Israeli military, who met Sheikh Khalifa in Doha last week.

Word of the possible visit first appeared in the daily newspaper Israel Hayom earlier this week, which quoted Mr. Shachor as saying that Qataris were interested in investing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in hi-tech and considered Israeli firms candidates for acquisitions. The item was later picked up by other news outlets.

“He spoke about coming and participating in the launch in East Jerusalem,’’ said Mr. Shachor, who has spearheaded the establishment of the arbitration court with Palestinian billionaire Munib Masri, told the Wall Street Journal. “It’s an opening to a dialogue – definitely on economic issues, and possibility on diplomatic issues.’’

Several attempts to reach Sheikh Khalifa over the past two days for comment were unsuccessful.  A spokesman for the Israeli foreign ministry said he was unaware of such a possibility.

Should it happen, such a trip would mark the highest ranking visit by a Persian Gulf royal to territory under Israeli sovereignty and send political ripples throughout the region.

Though the Jewish state is usually eager to promote any sort of public sign of normalization with the Arab world, relations between the two countries have been on a downward trajectory in recent years.

The Emir has been a top regional ally of Hamas, and shut down Israel’s trade office in Qatar in 2009 to protest Israel’s military offensive in the Gaza Strip, a retaliation to Hamas rocket strikes. The nadir came at the end of 2012, when he annoyed Israeli leaders by becoming the first head of state to visit the Gaza Strip under Hamas control to announce hundreds of millions of dollars worth of infrastructure projects.

At the same time, the real estate arm of Qatar’s Sovereign Wealth Fund is investing more than a half billion dollars in the construction of the Rawabi housing development, a massive West Bank project that has created 3,000 jobs. Just last month, The Qatari emir called for a $1 billion Arab fund to help Palestinians in East Jerusalem.

Years ago the Qatar government made a more modest contribution inside Israel when it chipped in on a publicly funded soccer stadium for the Israeli Arab Team Bnei Sakhnin, after they won Israel’s state cup in 2004.

And, earlier this week, Qatar’s Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassem bin Jaber Al Thani said in Washington that the Arab League supported a peace deal that would include territorial swaps – indirect recognition that some Israeli settlements build in the West Bank could be annexed to Israel.

The two countries might have overlapping interests in the outcome of the Syrian civil war. Qatar has also been a major ally of the U.S. in pushing for the replacement President Bashar Assad.

Mr. Shachor said the Israeli commercial delegation got a “warm and friendly’’ reception in Doha, the site of last week’s World Chamber of Commerce convention. He said he met with Sheikh Khalifa on the sidelines after making a presentation about the arbitration court – a joint venture with the Palestinian chamber of commerce that will be under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce.

Dubbed the “Jerusalem Arbitration Center,’’ the court will have Palestinian, Israeli and international experts in arbitration and law. The idea behind the court is to give Israeli and Palestinian businessmen peace of mind that they can adjudicate cross-border dispute in a neutral forum and hopefully expand their $4 billion in annual trade. The court will be chaired by Rifat Hisarcıklıoğlu, a Turkish business leader close to Turkish President Abdullah Gul.

The plan got an enthusiastic response from the Qatari royal, who said that he wanted to attend the November launch, according to Mr. Shachor.

“He said, `I can tell you that I want to come, but sometimes surprises happen. Barring that, I promise to come,’’’ Mr. Shachor said.

An Israeli foreign ministry official expressed caution, noting that the government hasn’t been informed of any such plan by Qatar, and that Israelis have often talked about plans for cooperation and normalization with Arab states that don’t come to fruition.

Pakistan Pre-Election Terrorist Attacks Primarily Target Moderate and Pseudo-Islamists: A Timeline

Pakistan Terrorist Attacks Before General Elections: A Timeline

By Faseeh Mangi

Following is a list of terrorist attacks before the general elections scheduled for May 11. At least 89 people have been killed and 418 injured since violence began last month.

May 6: An explosion at a public gathering of religious party Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam kills 15 people and injures 47 in the tribal area of Kurram Agency.

May 6: An explosion near the car of election candidate Abdul Malik in Baluchistan injures two.

May 6: An election office of Pakistan Peoples’ Party is blown up in Charsadda district of northern Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province.

May 6: Independent candidate Mir Iqbal Zehri escapes unhurt from a hand grenade attack on his convoy in Mastung district of western province Baluchistan.

May 6: Three polling stations in Pakistan’s Baluchistan province are blown up using time bombs.

May 5: Independent candidate Sarfaraz Domki’s convoy is attacked in Sibi, Baluchistan. Two security guards are killed.

May 5: An explosion near the office of Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam in Quetta left two workers injured.

May 5: A hand grenade is hurled at a corner meeting of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf in Mardan, injuring at least three people.

May 4: Two explosions take place near the headquarters of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement in Karachi, killing two and injuring 35 people.

May 3: Awami National Party candidate Sadiq Zaman Khattak and his six-year-old son are shot dead outside a mosque.

May 2: A bomb explosion at a mosque adjacent to an office of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement leaves at least nine people injured in Karachi.

May 2: Two schools designated as polling stations are blown up in the Naseerabad district of the western province of Baluchistan.

May 1: A suicide bomber blows himself up near the bulletproof vehicle of election candidate Mohammad Ibrahim Jatoi of National People’s Party in the southern province of Sindh, damaging the car and injuring three people.

May 1: Rockets are fired from nearby mountains at a gathering of political party Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl in the southwestern city of Quetta, injuring four in the stampede after the attack.

May 1: Militants hurl a grenade at the election office of candidate Nawabzada Lashkari Raisani of Pakistan Muslim League- Nawaz in Quetta, injuring four workers.

April 30: Abdul Fatah, independent candidate from Baluchistan, and two others are shot dead and two people are injured in Jhal Magsi after an exchange of fire with unidentified armed men.

April 29: A bomb explodes near an election office of the Awami National Party in Charsadda, killing one person and injuring 15.

April 29: A suicide bomber blows himself up near a bus stand in Peshawar, killing 9 and injuring 43. Two employees of the Afghan consulate are among the dead.

April 28: A bomb strapped to a bicycle explodes outside the office of independent candidate Nasir Khan Afridi in Peshawar, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, killing three and injuring 20.

April 28: An election convoy of Awami National Party is targeted with a remote-controlled bomb, leaving one dead and 13 injured in Swabi, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa.

April 28: A bomb explodes near election offices of Khursheed Begum from the Awami National Party and independent candidate Noor Akbar Khan in Kohat town of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province, killing five and injuring 23.

April 27: Awami National Party’s local leader Ghazi Gul is shot dead by gunmen near his residence in Karachi.

April 27: Two attacks within minutes of each other near Muttahida Qaumi Movement’s office in Karachi leave at least three dead and 27 injured.

April 27: A bomb explodes at a corner meeting of Pakistan Peoples’ Party in Karachi killing at least two and injuring 15.

April 26: A bomb attack on an election rally in Pakistan’s commercial hub of Karachi kills nine people and injures 24. Attack targets Awami National Party election candidate Bashir Jan.

April 26: Hand grenades are hurled and rockets fired at a rally of Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (F) party in Bolan district, Baluchistan.

April 25: Bomb fitted into motorcycle explodes in front of Muttahida Qaumi Movement’s office in Karachi, killing 6 and injuring 8.

April 25: A hand grenade is hurled at the election office of Pakistan Peoples’ Party in Nushki, Baluchistan, injuring two people.

April 24: Five bombings in the southwestern city of Quetta in two days kill six and injure 52.

April 23: Bomb attack in Karachi near a roadside camp of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement kills 2 and hurts 15.

April 23: Pakistani police find a car packed with explosives near the Islamabad residence of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf, where he is being kept under house arrest.

April 17: Awami National Party’s Farooq Khan escapes unhurt after a bomb blast targeted his vehicle in the northwestern city of Charsadda.

April 16: A bomb blast near a political rally for the Awami National Party in Peshawar kills at least eight people and injures 40.

April 16: A roadside bomb targeting a regional chief from former premier Nawaz Sharif’s party kills at least four, including the son and brother of Baluchistan provincial president Sardar Sanaullah Zehri.

April 14: Syed Masoom Shah, an election candidate of the Awami National Party, is injured along with three other people in a blast at a rally in Charsadda. In another incident, a local leader of the same party is shot dead in the northwestern Swat Valley.

April 11: Fakhrul Islam, a candidate of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, is killed in a gun attack in Hyderabad.

April 3: Adnan Aslam, a candidate from the Pakistan Peoples’ Party, is killed in a gun attack in Karachi.

To contact the reporter on this story: Faseeh Mangi in Karachi at fmangi@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Naween A. Mangi at nmangi1@bloomberg.net

4 Saudi Arabians Arrested After “Al-Qaeda” Bombing Of Catholic Church In Tanzania

[All terrorism linked to Saudis is "al-Qaeda," since the international Islamist terror front would not exist without the Saudis, to instigate the terrorist nightmare of Wahhabi "Shariah" attacks.]

Tanzania police: 4 Saudi Arabian nationals arrested after bomb attack on Catholic church

Associated Press

• 
• 

ZANZIBAR, Tanzania –  A police commander in Tanzania says four Saudi Arabian citizens have been arrested following a bomb attack on a Catholic church.Magesa Mulogo said Monday that the four Saudi nationals were among six people arrested.

Mulongo said two people died in Sunday’s bombing of a newly opened church in the northern city of Arusha. Nearly four dozen people were wounded in the blast just before the church’s inaugural Mass, which was attended by the pope’s envoy to Tanzania.

Mulogo said eyewitnesses reported that the bomb was thrown from a motorcycle into the church. Mulogo said the driver of the motorcycle is among those arrested.

Turkey vs Iraq–We Are Witnessing the Next Regional War Setting-Up In The Middle East

[Obama and all previous American presidents like to lead, until plans go sour, then it becomes advantageous to let our underlings take the heat for us.  We are now letting Turkey "take one for the team" all over the Middle East and in parts of Central Asia, as they become the focal point for the anti-Iranian ambitions of the Gulf/Israeli coalition, who carry the ball for Western interests in the Mideast.  The Sunni Gulf States help provide the black ops financing to the Saudi Islamist project (otherwise known as "al-Qaeda"), which supplies the foot soldiers for Israel's terrorist operations throughout the Muslim world.  The Mossad, helps the CIA and the Pentagon to locate and acquire the weapons needed by this Sunni "Islamist" army, which facilitates CIA plans for a regional war, stretching from Central Africa into Pakistan.  In both Iraq and in Syria, Turkey is fully prepared to accept global oppobrium for having led the charge straight into a grand civil war within Islam itself. 

opprobrium \uh-PRO-bree-uhm\ , noun:
1. Disgrace; infamy; reproach mingled with contempt.
2. A cause or object of reproach or disgrace.

Perhaps the saddest part of this grand tragedy is that the tragic civil war unfolding in Iraq was always part of a cleverly crafted plan, a plan designed to amplify the great conflict within Islam, the never-ending argument between the Sunni and Shia faiths.  One side teaches that the Quran's authority and the mantle of The Prophet (PBUH) rests upon the actual bloodline of Mohammad (PBUH), the Shia opinion, the other side teaches that the Muslim elite should choose the most popular scholar of the Quran (Sunni).  The Sunnis even elevate the teachings of these Islamic scholars to a level of prominence equal to that of the Sacred Book itself. 

The American/British/Israeli "Zionist" plan to throw all of our weight behind the Sunnis in this conflict (intending to force a violent resolution of the issue) is obviously immoral, thus necessitating the American need for cover, whenever this ugly fact threatens to be revealed, that Christian/Judaic powers are waging a covert "Crusade" against Islam.  This Judeo-Christian Crusade to destroy Islam would never have been possible without the Sunni collaborators from the Middle East who have actually executed the plan.  Turkey stands at the top of this long list of Islamic traitor nations, who have collaborated intimately with the West to destroy the faith of 1.3 billion Muslims.  As long as the great Muslim majority can be kept in the dark about the Arab/Israeli union at the center of this Crusade they can be expected to allow all of this to continue indefinitely, enabling Turkey to escape that well-deserved popular revulsion for its acts of treachery.]

Saadun al-Dulaimi: Turkey controls Sunni protests against Maliki

BAGHDAD – Acting Defence Minister Saadun al-Dulaimi on Sunday accused Turkey of controlling Sunni anti-government protests in Iraq, saying the demonstrations are a haven for “terrorists and killers.”

“There are foreign agendas controlling these sites,” Dulaimi said of the protests.

“It is like Anbar, or Mosul or Samarra are part of the Ottoman Empire,” he said, referring to Sunni areas in Iraq.

Areas of what is now Iraq were part of the Ottoman Empire, which was governed from Istanbul in what is now Turkey, before the empire’s dissolution after World War I.

Ties between Baghdad and Ankara have been strained by issues including Turkey hosting Tareq al-Hashemi, Iraq’s fugitive former vice president who has been sentenced to death on charges including murder.

Dulaimi also had harsh words for the protesters themselves.

“Shame… on those sites that are opening their doors to Istanbul or any other country,” he said.

“Protest sites have become a safe haven for terrorists and killers and those who call for strife, sectarianism and hate.”

The protests broke out in Sunni areas of Shiite-majority Iraq more than four months ago.

Demonstrators have called for the resignation of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a Shiite, and criticised authorities for allegedly targeting their community with wrongful detentions and accusations of involvement in terrorism.

On April 23, security forces moved on protesters near the town of Hawijah in Kirkuk province, sparking clashes that killed 53 people.

Dozens more died in subsequent unrest that included revenge attacks targeting security forces, raising fears of a return to the all-out sectarian conflict that claimed tens of thousands of lives between 2006 and 2008.

 

 

Israel Becomes “Al-Qaeda’s Air Force” In Syria–Joins Arab Coalition, Then Bombs Syrian Govt. Targets

“The new Israeli aggression is a clear attempt to raise the gunmen morale after the painful blows they received at the hands of our valiant army in several places and after the achievements which were realized on the ground by our armed forces to restore security and stability to Syria.

The new Israeli aggression shows the direct involvement of the Zionist entity in the conspiracy against Syria and the relationship that links the armed terrorist groups with the Israeli hostile schemes backed by the Western, regional and some Gulf states.”– Sana

[SEE:  Al-Qaeda’s Air Force]

Israeli strikes on Syria ‘co-ordinated with terrorists’

Israeli strikes on Syrian army targets show co-ordination with “terrorists” including al-Qaeda linked militants, the Syrian foreign ministry has said.

The strikes had led to a number of casualties and widespread damage, it reported in a letter sent to the UN.

State media said a research centre and other sites had been hit overnight. Israeli sources said weapons bound for Hezbollah in Lebanon were the target.

The strike, the second in two days, drew condemnation from the Arab League.

Syria’s government refers to rebels fighting against it as “terrorists”.

On Friday, Israeli aircraft hit a shipment of missiles near the Lebanon border, according to unnamed US and Israeli officials.

The BBC’s Yolande Knell in Jerusalem says the latest developments are a significant escalation in Israel’s involvement in the conflict.

The Syrian foreign ministry statement said three military sites had been hit – a research centre at Jamraya, a paragliding airport in the al-Dimas area of Damascus and a site in Maysaloun.

“The flagrant Israeli attack on armed forces sites in Syria underlines the co-ordination between ‘Israel’, terrorist groups and… the al-Nusra Front,” the statement said, referring to al-Qaeda militants fighting with the rebels.

“The Israeli attack led to the fall of a number of martyrs and wounded from the ranks of Syrian citizens, and led to widespread destruction in these sites and in the civilian districts near to them.”

The statement added: “This leaves no room for doubt Israel is the beneficiary, the mover and sometime the executor of the terrorist acts which Syria is witnessing and which target it as a state and people directly or through its tools inside.”

Syrian Information Minister Omran Zoabi said Israeli air strikes have “opened the door to all possibilities”

The Syrian cabinet held an emergency meeting on the attacks, after which Information Minister Omran al-Zohbi read a statement at a news conference.

He said the attack made the Middle East “more dangerous” and “opens the door wide to all possibilities”.

Syria had the right and the duty “to defend its people by all available means,” he added.

‘Biggest explosion’

In the latest attack, Damascus was shaken by repeated explosions coming from the north-western suburbs.

Amateur video footage and eyewitness testimony suggested rocket attacks had hit weapons dumps, triggering dramatic orange-flamed blasts.

The area houses numerous military facilities, including the Jamraya research centre, designated by Syria as a scientific research centre “in charge of raising our level of resistance and self-defence”.

Damascus-based journalist Alaa Ebrahim told the BBC it was “the biggest explosion” the city had seen since the conflict began two years ago.

He said residents living near Jamraya reported feeling a “mild earthquake” just before the blast, indicating that the rockets may have hit an underground facility.

Our correspondent says the Israeli attack is a high-risk strategy, and it has drawn strong reaction from the rest of the Arab world.

The Egyptian presidency said they “violated international law and principles that will further complicate the situation”.

“Despite its strong opposition to bloodshed in Syria and the Syrian army’s use of weapons against its people… Egypt rejects at the same time the assault on Syria’s capabilities, violation of its sovereignty, and exploitation of its internal crisis under any pretext,” the presidency’s statement said.

And the Arab League, which has given its Syria seat to the rebels, called on the UN Security Council to “act immediately” to end the attacks.

The Jamraya facility was also apparently hit in an Israeli air strike in January.

Israeli officials confirmed the January strike, but insisted trucks carrying missiles to Hezbollah were the target.

After the latest attack, unnamed Western intelligence sources said the target was a weapons cache heading for Lebanon.

Israel has repeatedly said it would act if it felt advanced weapons were being transferred to militant groups in the region, especially Hezbollah.

Imran In Scathing Attack On Convenient “Islamist” Fazl–CHANGE PAKISTAN ON MAY 11

[Fazl and those like him, who treat the Islamic faith as a "convenient" political ladder to self-elevation are the bane of those with True Faith.  The Convenience of Political Islam for those slothful, evil men, who know neither morality nor honesty, is at the root of the global conflict within Islam itself.  The Saudis and those who feed at their trough have spread this corrupted message all over the Muslim world, while reinforcing its message with the largesse of treasure.  This has misled many.  Pakistani politicians have faithfully travelled this path for many decades.  It is time to change this equation, so that true democracy might really turn-out to be Pakistan's salvation. 

VOTE MAY 11.]

Imran in scathing attack on Fazl

PTI chief Imran Khan pictured outside his helicopter after speaking at a rally in Charsada on Saturday.

PESHAWAR: In sharp contrast to his Sharif-bashing in Punjab, Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf chairman Imran Khan on Saturday turned his guns towards JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman, accusing him of exploiting the sacred name of Islam to reach the corridors of power.

Speaking at election rallies in a whirlwind tour of what is known as the Peshawar Valley, the PTI chief said that Maulana Fazlur Rehman was shedding crocodile’s tears and was befooling the people again in the name of Islam. The Maulana had always politicised Islam to serve his own interests, he alleged.

The towns Imran Khan visited were Charsadda, Mardan, Swabi and Buner.

He charged that Maulana Fazlur Rehman, Awami National Party, Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari were responsible for destruction of the country. The time, he said, had come to hold looters accountable. “The nation will reject the plunderers of national wealth on May 11.”

Addressing a public meeting in Nowshera, Imran Khan said that no corrupt leader or party would be able to face PTI’s tsunami on the election day. He said the enthusiasm of youth would change the country and make a new Pakistan.

Lashing out at the JUI-F chief, he said that for five years, Maulana Fazl had kept mum over the bloodshed of thousands of innocent Pakhtuns and remained hand in glove with President Asif Zardari to stick to power.

The PTI chief claimed that his forewarning against joining the US-led “war on terror” had come true. “I never said it was our war as it neither was nor ever will be.

Pakistan drew fire to the peril of its people by readily becoming America’s lieutenant in this war for no reason”, he said.

In Charsadda, Imran Khan said that after coming to power, the PTI would restore the dignity of Pakistan in international community, which he said was badly damaged by the previous governments.

He continued to target Maulana Fazlur Rehman, saying that the JUI-(F leader was responsible for the killings of thousands of people during the Afghan war. Maulana Fazl never spoke against US drone strikes and military operations in the country, Imran said, adding that the JUI-F leader had adopted a dubious policy to deceive the masses.

Addressing a rally in Swabi, Imran Khan said the Pakistan Muslim League- Nawaz and the Pakistan People’s Party had dominated the country’s politics since 1988, but they had utterly failed to deliver the goods.

He said that the two major parties and their allies would taste a crushing defeat and the PTI tsunami would sweep them away from power corridors. “We are poised to say goodbye to all former political actors on May 11 and those who labelled us as Jew and Qadiani will not be able to re-enter the parliament to devour public money,” he said.

He bitterly criticised JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman, President Asif Ali Zardari, Mian Nawaz Sharif and ANP president Asfandyar Wali Khan, calling them political actors and US stooges.

“They always look to the Americans’ nod and wink in all affairs,” he said. “If we are voted to power on May 11, we will neither remain under American influence nor work according to their agenda. “We oppose US drone strikes. If we are voted to power, there will be no drone attacks in Pakistan. The PTI will formulate an independent foreign policy,” he said.

He said that the former rulers indulged in corruption, looting national exchequer and inflicting a colossal loss to the country and its people. “This practice is not acceptable to PTI and the youth of the country have been awakened. Those who ruined the country could not rebuild it”, he said. “The PTI will make a new Pakistan where justice, peace and prosperity will prevail,” said Mr Khan.

YOUTH AND DREAM: In Buner, the PTI chief said the enthusiastic youths would make the dream of a new Pakistan come true on May 11.

He said that after coming to power the PTI would explore the local natural resources to end loadshedding and would create employment opportunities for the youth.

He pointed to the cheering crowd, saying that “these change-makers” will ensure a positive change on May 11.

In Mardan, Imran Khan said American drones would be shot down if his party was elected to power in the coming general elections.

All nominated candidates on three National Assembly and eight PK constituencies of Mardan were present on the occasion.

He said the PTI supporters had struggled and waited for the last 17 years to lay foundation of a new Pakistan and now the dawn was nigh as the people would witness the start of a new Pakistan on May 11.

He said the ANP promoted the culture of easy load and plundered both the people and the public money ruthlessly.

He hit out at the JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman for making propaganda against him (Imran Khan) that he had been backed by Jews and Qadyani.

“I am a true Muslim and believe that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the last prophet,” he said, asking Maulana Fazl to stop telling lies to the people. He accused Maulana Fazl of making money through corrupt practices and diesel permits.

The Maulana supported Pervez Musharraf and President Asif Ali Zardari “during their regimes of corruption”.

Bhutto Prosecutor Murdered After Charging Musharraf with Murder–Military Blames “Militants”

["Zulfikar was probably a marked man because he had been prosecuting militants who were jailed in connection with Bhutto's death."--Reuters]

BB murder case prosecutor shot dead in Islamabad

The Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) special prosecutor in the Benazir Bhutto murder case Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ali.—Photo by AFP

AFP

ISLAMABAD: Two unknown assailants on motorcycle killed The Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) special prosecutor in the Benazir Bhutto murder case Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ali on Friday, DawnNews reported.

According to the police, state prosecutor Chaudhry Zulfiqar was shot multiple times by gunmen in Islamabad’s G-9 area as he was driving to the next hearing in the murder case of the former prime minister, who was assassinated more than five years ago. Following the attack, he was taken to Islamabad’s main government-run Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) hospital in a severely injured condition where he succumbed to his injuries.

Doctors said he had been killed with ten bullets targeting his chest and shoulder.

Zulfiqar had been given extra government security last year after police investigators working on the Benazir Bhutto case received threats, which also named him.

It was not immediately clear who was responsible for the shooting.

“I cannot comment. I’m in a state of shock,” Zulfiqar’s deputy Azhar Chaudhry told AFP when asked to comment.

Moreover, the firing incident also killed a woman and injured Chaudhry Zulfiqar’s guard Rehman Ali when he lost control of his vehicle.

Later, Zulfiqar’s body was shifted to the hospital’s morgue and a medical team was being constituted to perform postmortem. Wasim Khawaja, spokesman for PIMS, confirmed that his bodyguard was out of danger.

Police subsequently cordoned off the site of incident and started a search operation in the area.

Rawalpindi and Islamabad High Court (IHC) Bar Association’s lawyers announced a strike in the wake of the attack.

Interior Minister Malik Habib Khan has also taken notice of the incident.

Saudi Arabia Denies Previous Saudi Leak To Daily Mail, Which Denies Links To Boston bombers

[SEE:  Saudis Appear Frantic As They Attempt To Deflect Blame for Boston Bombing]

Saudi Arabia denies Daily Mail’s MailOnline Article on Boston bombers

May 1, 2013

The Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia today denied a story in the Daily Mail’s MailOnline that Saudi Arabia provided information to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) prior to the Boston bombings.

“The Saudi government had no prior information about the Boston bombers. Therefore, it is not true that any information, written or otherwise, was passed to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or any other US agency in this regard. The Saudi government also does not have any record of any application by Tamerlan Tsarnaev for any visa to Saudi Arabia.”

Pakistani and Afghan Taliban Execute Two of Karzai’s Emissaries, Proving They Are ONE

[Two days ago, the Pakistani Taliban killed the son of another High Peace Council member, providing further evidence that the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban ARE ONE.  They are both waging war against Karzai's peace emissaries at the same time, proving that their actions are coordinated and their objectives are the same.  Both swear allegiance to Mullah Omar.  Mullah Omar and all of his armies owe allegiance to the Pak Army, since they are products of the Pakistani ISI. 

The purpose of terrorism is not to terrorize, but to motivate the victimized civilian populace into submission to unpleasant political conditions.  Those conditions can best be described as Wahhabi "Shariah."  Having the same goals since the beginning, the revived Taliban ("neo-Taliban") are there to give Pakistan control over Afghanistan,  If Obama actually intends to hand the Afghanistan transition to Pakistan, as rumored, he will be handing Afghanistan to the Taliban, completing his total "Islamization" of all Middle Eastern countries from Morroco to Islamabad.  Obama is pushing the radicalized faith upon the Muslim masses, just as surely if he has been the one issuing all of the jihadi "fatwas."]

“Hilal Ahmad Waqad was organizing a conference of Afghan and Pakistani religious scholars to oppose militancy.                                                                                                                                                                                    [He] was the son of Afghan cleric Amin Waqad, a member of Afghanistan’s High Peace Council, which is trying to engage the Afghan Taliban in peace talks.”

Afghan peace council official killed in south

KABUL, Afghanistan—Insurgents ambushed an Afghan government peace negotiator on Wednesday, killing him and two bodyguards as they headed to a meeting in the south to discuss plans for local troops to take over responsibility from the U.S-led coalition, Afghan officials said.

Malim Shah Wali Khan, 53, who sat on a council tasked with starting talks with the Taliban in hopes of ending the nearly 12-year-old war, was killed when attackers hit his convoy with a bomb and automatic rifle fire, Helmand provincial spokesman Omer Zawak said.

The province’s deputy governor, Masoud Bakhtawer, was also wounded in the attack, which took place in the same district where Afghan forces will shortly be in control. Helmand has been one the war’s bloodiest battlefields and a traditional Taliban stronghold.

Khan was the provincial director of the High Peace Council, a group formed by President Hamid Karzai to try and find ways to initiate peace talks with the insurgents. The council has so far failed to start any form of negotiations with the Taliban since U.S.-initiated peace talks collapsed last year.

In a statement, Karzai “strongly condemned” the attack that killed Khan and said that “the enemies of Afghanistan are trying to attack and martyr those individuals who are doing their best to bring peace and stability to the country.”

The U.S.-led coalition has been handing over responsibility for security in the province, and around the country, to Afghan forces as foreign combat troops prepare to withdraw by end-2014. So far, the Afghan government is in charge of areas representing 80 percent of the country’s population. It hopes to assume full control by the early summer.

The British Ministry of Defense on Wednesday also said three of its soldiers were killed in Helmand by a roadside bomb. NATO had announced the deaths on Tuesday but had not identified the nationalities of the soldiers.

The soldiers were on patrol when their armored vehicle struck the bomb. Insurgents have increased their attacks in recent weeks and since they announced the start of their spring offensive on April 27.

In other developments, health officials were investigating why nearly 70 students at a high school near the capital became ill on Wednesday.

Amanullah Eman, a spokesman for the Education Ministry, said some students were briefly hospitalized but all were doing well. He said a number of factors were being investigated, including the use of fertilizers in nearby farm land.

There have been numerous cases of dozens of school children falling ill during the spring, when Afghan students return to school. Although some officials in the past have blamed the Taliban for attempting to poison students, the insurgents have repeatedly denied any involvement and no proof has ever been found of deliberate poisoning. Experts have instead blamed mass hysteria for many of the cases.

—

Mirwais Khan contributed from Kandahar and Patrick Quinn from Kabul.

hanistan—Insurgents ambushed an Afghan government peace negotiator on Wednesday, killing him and two bodyguards as they headed to a meeting in the south to discuss plans for local troops to take over responsibility from the U.S-led coalition, Afghan officials said.

Malim Shah Wali Khan, 53, who sat on a council tasked with starting talks with the Taliban in hopes of ending the nearly 12-year-old war, was killed when attackers hit his convoy with a bomb and automatic rifle fire, Helmand provincial spokesman Omer Zawak sai

Those who kill in the name of Islam are terrorists and criminals, who ”do not represent Islam at all”

Jihad means Dawah [proper presentation, understanding and appreciation of Islam in its real spirit]. People have misunderstood the concept of jihad. Islam does not permit extremism in all its manifestations, misconstrued for jihad by some unscrupulous elements.

Those who kill people for any reason are terrorists and criminals. They do not represent Islam at all but their own agenda and covetousness. Nobody has the right to snatch anyone’s life. Mankind belongs to Almighty Allah, who is supreme and the only authority [allowed] to snatch life. Qur’an describes Muslims as a “moderate community” and urges them to be merciful, kind and tolerant towards people of other communities as well.–Maulana Wahiduddin Khan

Those who kill in the name of Islam are terrorists and criminals who ”do not represent Islam at all”, says renowned Indian scholar Maulana Wahiduddin Khan. [Sagar Fazal/Khabar]

Maulana: Islam does not permit extremism

In Islam, no one is allowed to snatch a life, world-renowned Islamic scholar and peace activist Maulana Wahiduddin Khan tells Khabar South Asia in an exclusive interview.

By Altaf Ahmad for Khabar South Asia in New Delhi
Maulana Wahiduddin Khan of India is known worldwide for his teachings on modern Islam, non-violence, and interfaith harmony. He has authored more than 200 books, including, most recently, “The Prophet of Peace” and “Jihad, Peace and Inter-Community Relations in Islam”. An expert in religious affairs, Khan lectures on several popular television channels.

Born in Uttar Pradesh in 1925, he has received numerous national and international awards, including the Padma Bhushan, India’s third-highest civilian honour, the National Integration Award, the Communal Harmony Award, and the National Citizen’s Award, and many others.

Khabar: How do you see Islam and Muslims in the world today?

Khan: Islam advocates equality, peace and brotherhood, but in contemporary times, xenophobia has influenced the Muslim community. Islam urges Muslims to be the ambassadors of peace and brotherhood, but a section of Muslims on the other hand are involved in extremism and prejudice. Intolerance is highly denounced in Islam, and Muslims should exhibit tolerance and promote peace and brotherhood in all circumstances.

Khabar: Have Muslim clergy failed to play their role in spreading Islam in its real spirit? Prophet Muhammad said, “When leaders and clergy are on the right path, people will be on the same path”.

Khan: Muslim clergy tend to be ignorant to their duty and unfortunately have stayed away from the noble mission of Dawah (proper presentation, understanding and appreciation of Islam in its real spirit). In my opinion, they have failed to remove misconceptions about the religion, and contributed in bringing about a good deal of moral degradation among Muslims.

Islam stands for justice, peace and harmony. Extremism is not admissible in Islam. As far as the role of clergy is concerned, Prophet Muhammad says, “The Ulema (scholar) is one who knows the era and people he represents”. When clergy is unaware or unmindful of the affairs of the world, they are bound to lack vision and wisdom.

Khabar: There is a lot of confusion regarding jihad in Islam. What exactly does Holy Qur’an says about jihad?

Khan: Jihad means Dawah. People have misunderstood the concept of jihad. Islam does not permit extremism in all its manifestations, misconstrued for jihad by some unscrupulous elements.

Those who kill people for any reason are terrorists and criminals. They do not represent Islam at all but their own agenda and covetousness. Nobody has the right to snatch anyone’s life. Mankind belongs to Almighty Allah, who is supreme and the only authority [allowed] to snatch life. Qur’an describes Muslims as a “moderate community” and urges them to be merciful, kind and tolerant towards people of other communities as well.

Khabar: How do you view disorder and violence in different parts of the world? Who in your opinion is responsible for such inhuman acts?

Khan: Criminals and terrorists commit such inhuman acts. Such extremists have no religion. We need to denounce inhuman acts committed by these people for their own vested interests.

Khabar: In what situation and for which offences does Islam permit capital punishment?

Khan: Almighty God has created man with utmost respect and dignity. No one is allowed to snatch a life or commit murder of a human being. In Islam, capital punishment is permitted when somebody is murdered in cold blood.

Khabar: What is the legality of blasphemy in Islam? Is capital punishment the only way to deal with blasphemy?

Khan: There is no prescribed law for blasphemy in Islam. Muslims should exhibit tolerance and demonstrate wisdom. Violent protests against Danish cartoonist (Kurt Westergaard) and Salman Rushdie for their anti-Islamic views were a waste of energy. If someone writes against the Prophet Muhammad, we should have sound knowledge to dislodge his propaganda and prove him wrong. We should be well-equipped with logic and reasons to counter unscrupulous elements who want to create confusion with regard to Islam.

Those who embraced Islam in early ages were the opponents of Prophet Muhammad. Prophet Muhammad never expressed anger against them or awarded any kind of punishment. Exhibiting high moral and character, Prophet Muhammad converted his enemies into loyalists and trusted friends.

Khabar: What is the significance of the Hijab (veil) in Islam? Is head cover mandatory for girls in schools and colleges? Most Western colleges don’t permit veils.

Khan: Hijab is not what women and girls wear in present times. Schools, colleges and universities have their own set of rules. Girl students should follow and abide by them. Islam does not permit to create disorder in any institution in any circumstances. If you do not like some rules and regulations of an institution, that does not mean you will create problems for others by enforcing your own set of rules.

Islam urges you to be an honest and honourable citizen. One should be loyal to his or her country and likewise to the rules governing an educational institution. You can never be a good Muslim unless you are a good citizen of your country.

Khabar: What role do you see for madrassas in promotion of peace and quality education?

Khan: The madrassas have a limited role and they can’t go beyond that. You cannot expect madrassas to produce Nobel laureates, eminent scientists and reformists. Madrassas teach you about performing Namaz and Hajj (Prayers and Pilgrimage). Worldly knowledge is a must for producing eminent persons in the field of science, information technology and engineering, and Islam is not against it.

 

 

 

Zionist Brits Contemplating Plans To Allow Sharia Courts

[The best way to create resistance to Wahhabi Shariah law is to allow the lunatic Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice to enforce it against the people.  Even the "Islamist" FATA Region of Pakistan turned against "Shariah" when the Army allowed the insane little Islamist Sufi Muhammad to establish his "Qazi courts" there.  Perhaps it is time to allow the same demonstration of intentions in Britain.]]

Salafi Cleric Says “Fighting Infidels” Only Way To Impose Sharia Law…

Muslim leaders ‘need to be clear on Sharia plans’

Chris Young, in Bradford

Islamic leaders “urgently” need to explain what they mean by the term Sharia to prevent “fear of the public lash,” according to a member of the Bradford Council of Mosques.

Ishtiaq Ahmed feels that although the UK is generally tolerant in allowing Muslims to freely practice their faith, the ideas behind Sharia need to be better explained if the community wants to move ahead with proposed Sharia councils.

He described the recent debate over the issue as “intense, fraught and multi-dimensional.”

Sharia is the moral code and religious law of Islam, and it recently hit the headlines when plans were announced to introduce a Sharia council in Bradford, which would deal with matters like marriage break-ups.

The move was particularly criticised by Keighley MP Kris Hopkins, who felt it would undermine the UK legal system. Last week he led a Parliamentary debate in which he argued that such councils should not be supported by the Government.

The Council of Mosques has since accused Mr Hopkins of misrepresenting their wishes, and insist that Sharia councils would only be there for guidance, and not to supersede UK law.

Mr Ahmed says there is a great deal of misunderstanding over the issue, but some of the responsibility for this lies with the Muslim community itself.

He said: “In the absence of an Islamic State, or where the state allows no provision for the Islamic community, the compliance of Sharia is a matter for personal discretion. This may be supported and guided by a community-based faith infrastructure, for example, Mosques, Sharia Councils or similar bodies.

“The anxiety is due partly to the misinterpretation of the Islamic community’s intentions, and the British establishment’s fear of public lash and not to be seen to be making concessions towards the Islamic community.

“The Islamic leadership must share some of the responsibility for the situation by not defining and stating its objectives clearly regarding the Islamic Sharia compliance in Britain.

“The need to do this is paramount and urgent.

“There is also a strong case for making the work of Sharia Councils more open and transparent to dispel fears that anyone may have about their roles and functions.”

Saudis Appear Frantic As They Attempt To Deflect Blame for Boston Bombing

[In a typical Saudi misdirection, the royals are anxiously trying to turn the investigation away from the one Saudi name that has been tied to the case, Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi.  The more they protest, and the louder their denials become, the more obvious it becomes that the masters of Sunni world terrorism have a lot to hide in this latest militant "Islamist" terror attack upon the citizens of the United States of America.  If our own FBI was not totally compromised by them and the never-ending cover-up of Saudi/CIA atrocities and an assortment of crimes against humanity, then they might pursue the Saudi connection to its logical conclusion, not to another predetermined dead-end.

FRY THE ROYALS!]

  Saudi foreign ministry, Prince Saud bin al-Faisal (R), had an unscheduled meeting with Obama in the Oval Office just two days after the Boston bombings

Saudi Arabia reportedly sent written warning to US about Boston Marathon bombing accused Tamerlan Tsarnaev

SAUDI Arabia reportedly sent a written warning to the US about Boston Marathon suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev last year and refused him entry to the country over security concerns.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wrote to the US Department of Homeland Security about the older Tsarnaev brother in 2012, a senior Saudi official says.

The official told the Daily Mail the warning was based on intelligence from Yemen and was separate to concerns raised by Russian intelligence.

He also revealed Tamerlan was refused an entry visa into Saudi Arabia for the Mecca pilgrimage in December 2011.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26 and his younger brother Dzhokhar are accused of carrying out the April 15 bombings at the Boston Marathon, which killed three and wounded more than 264 at one of the world’s premier sporting events.

The Saudi official said the warning, which was also shared with the UK Government, was “very specific” and warned “something was going to happen in a major US city”.

The “government-to-government” letter “did name Tamerlan specifically”, the official told the Daily Mail.

An official from Homeland Security denied the department had received any such warning from Saudi Arabia.

“DHS has no knowledge of any communication from the Saudi government regarding information on the suspects in the Boston Marathon Bombing prior to the attack,” an unnamed offical told the Daily Mail.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev died in a shootout with police as he tried to flee the Boston area three days after the bombing.

Dzhokhar was wounded and captured, and now faces terror charges carrying a possible death sentence.

The Saudi official said the letter was sent by the Saudi Ministry of Interior in part so the US could inspect packages being sent to Tamerlan in the post.

“With Saudi Arabia it’s always code red,” he said.

“There’s no code orange, or code yellow. Always red.”

Zionist Wahhabis

[SEE:  Saudi Arabia working with Mossad against Iran, WikiLeaks suggests ;  Saudi Arabia is Israel’s last hope: report ]

The Saudi/Israeli Alliance

deLiberation

by Dean Henderson
Monday, April 9th, 2012

(Excerpted from Chapter 5: Persian Gulf Rent-a-Sheik: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)

Iran’s Press TV reported yesterday that both the US and the Saudis began funding Syrian rebels eight months ago. After funding Libyan Islamist rebels to overthrow Qaddafi, the Saudis and their fellow Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) despots have moved on in an effort to bring down Syria’s Assad government on their road to Tehran.

Both the Muslim Brotherhood House of Saud and Cabalist Israel share a long history with their Freemason brethren at British intelligence dating back to the Egyptian Mystery Schools.

The inbred Illuminati banker oligarchy runs all three secret societies and controls the global economy via central bank monopoly and hegemony over oil, arms and drug trades.

This Rothschild-led cabal of trillionaire Satanists manufacture fanatics within the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths to divide the people and maximize war profits.

Since Chevron discovered oil in Saudi Arabia in 1938, the House of Saud monarchy has increasingly served as paymaster for Rothschild covert military adventures.  It’s part of an oil for arms quid pro quo.

The Saudis sent over $3.8 billion to the CIA-trained Afghan mujahadeen.  Their emissary to the Americans was Osama bin Laden.

They gave $35 million to the Nicaraguan contras. Northrup/Lockheed bribe recipient Adnan Khashoggi played a key role in supplying Richard Secord’s Enterprise with House of Saud funding.  But while contra and mujahadeen efforts got the most newsprint, the House of Saud was busy bankrolling counterinsurgency around the world.

In Africa the Saudis provided support decades ago for the National Front for Salvation (NFS), which operated from bases in Chad in its attempts to overthrow Libyan President Mohamar Qaddafi.

Chad has long been an important country in Exxon Mobil’s North Africa oil production schemes.  In 1990- following a successful Libyan-backed counter-coup against the Chad government which was sponsoring NFS- the US evacuated 350 NFS leaders with Saudi financing.  The US restored $5 million in aid to the dictatorial Kenyan government of Daniel Arap Moi so Kenya would house the NFS leaders, whom other African governments refused to take in.  Arap Moi later aided CIA covert operations in Somalia, which the Saudis financed.

The Saudis bankrolled Jonas Savimbi’s UNITA rebels in Angola in their brutal effort to topple the socialist government of MPLA President Jose dos Santos.  Upon CIA request, the Saudis sent millions to Morocco to pay for that country’s training of UNITA.  Angola has huge oil reserves.  In 1985 Chevron Texaco accounted for 75% of Angola’s oil revenue.  In 1990 29% of Exxon Mobil’s US-bound crude came from Angola. An annual report of De Beers- the Oppenheimer-family tentacle which monopolizes the world diamond trade- bragged of buying up UNITA diamonds.  Savimbi was welcomed at the White House by President Reagan.

The Saudis funded RENAMO in their CIA-backed Pink Plan terror campaign against the nationalist government of Mozambique.  In the mid-1980s both the Saudis and Oman sent weapons to RENAMO through the Comoros Islands on behalf of Israel and apartheid South Africa.  Two Comoros Presidents- Ali Soilah and Ahmed Abdullah Abderemane- were assassinated by mercenaries who were protecting the arms traffic.

In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) – formerly Zaire- Illuminati puppet Mobutu Sese-Seiko ruled with an iron fist for nearly four decades. He served as City of London guard dog of Zaire’s rich cobalt, uranium and molybdenum reserves- all of which are vital to the US nuclear weapons program.  Zaire is also rich in copper, chromium, zinc, cadmium, tin, gold and platinum.  While Mobutu amassed over $5 billion in Swiss, Belgian and French bank accounts, Zaire’s people lived in squalor.

Mobutu was installed in the early 1960’s after CIA agent Frank Carlucci- later Reagan and Bush Defense Secretary and now chairman of bin Laden family investment advisor Carlyle Group- worked with gangsters to assassinate the first prime minister of the Congo Patrice Lumumba.  Under Mobutu’s reign the US had military bases at Kitona and Kamina- from where the CIA prosecuted covert wars against Angola, Mozambique and Namibia with House of Saud funding.  Mobutu’s DSP palace guard was trained by the Israeli Mossad.  In the late 1970’s the Saudis paid for imported Moroccan troops to save Mobutu from Katanganese secessionists led by Laurant Kabila.

Mobutu was deposed in 1998 by forces loyal to Kabila- a friend of Fidel Castro.  The Saudis began financing military forays into the Congo by the governments of Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi. This destabilization of the Lake’s region led to the Rwandan genocide.  Kabila was assassinated in 2000, after he refused to play Illuminati ball.  Over four million people have died in the DRC over the past decade.

Lumumba and Kabila weren’t the first African nationalists targeted for elimination by the inbreds.  During the 1950′s and 1960′s the CIA and French intelligence assassinated Moroccan nationalist Mehdi Ben Barka- whose Union Nationale de Forces Populaire threatened US puppet monarch King Hassan II.  Giunea’s leftist President Sekou Toure and Tunisian socialist Habib Bourgiba were also assassinated by Western intelligence agencies.

In 1993 Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir accused the Saudis of providing arms to Johnny Garung’s Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA).  The southern part of Sudan- which the SPLA is trying to partition- is rich in oil.  Mossad has supplied the SPLA for years through Kenya.  In 1996 the Clinton Administration announced military aid to Ethiopia, Eritrea and Uganda. The aid was funneled into an SPLA offensive on Khartoum.  The crisis in Darfur is a direct result of Saudi/Israeli/US meddling on behalf of Big Oil.

Algerian President Chadli Benjladid accused the Saudis of bankrolling the barbarous Armed Islamic Group (AIG) who- after Algeria protested US ignition of the Gulf War- launched a reign of terror targeted at the Algerian people. Benjladid was forced to resign. This was followed by hasty passage of the Hydrocarbon Law- which opened the historically socialist country’s oilfields to the Four Horsemen.  The CIA then helped AIG terrorists travel to Bosnia, where they helped destroy socialist Yugoslavia.

Algeria has a long history of defying Big Oil. President Houari Boumedienne- one of the great Arab socialist leaders of all time- initiated calls for a more just international economic order in fiery speeches at the UN. He encouraged producer cartels as a means to Third World emancipation from the London bankers.  Independent Italian oilman Enrico Mattei began negotiating with Algeria and other nationalistic OPEC states who wanted to sell their oil internationally without having to deal with the Four Horsemen.  In 1962 Mattei died in a mysterious plane crash.  Former French intelligence agent Thyraud de Vosjoli says his agency was involved.  William McHale of Time magazine, who covered Mattei’s attempt to break the Big Oil cartel, also died under strange circumstances.

In 1975 the US sent $138 million in military aid through Saudi Arabia to Yemen, in hopes of heading off a Marxist revolution there.  The effort failed and the country split into North and South Yemen for two decades before merging again in the 1990’s. US/Saudi aid to both Yemen and Oman continues to this day in an effort to stamp out nationalist movements in those countries, which border the Kingdom and its vast Four Horsemen-controlled oilfields.

During the US-led effort to partition Bosnia from Yugoslavia, Saudi King Faud led calls for an end to the UN arms embargo.  When the embargo was lifted, the Saudis funded Bosnian Muslim arms purchases.  Later the Saudis bankrolled the heroin-kingpin Kosovo Liberation Army, as well as NLA Albanian separatists attacking the nationalist government of Macedonia. The Saudis even funded CIA covert operations in Italy, where they plunked down $10 million in 1985 to help destroy the Communist Party.

Recently Saudi Prince Bandar donated $1 million to the Bush Sr. Presidential Library and another $1 million to a Barbara Bush literacy campaign. On the evening of September, 11, 2001- Prince Bandar smoked cigars in the White House with President Bush, while members of the bin Laden family were evacuated from the US in airspace shut down to all other traffic.

Were the Saudis simply playing their historic paymaster role in the prosecution of 911?

The largest shareholder in News Corporation – parent of both the banker mouthpiece Wall Street Journal and the Fox News psyop – is Rupert Murdoch. The 2nd largest owner is Saudi Prince Alaweed bin Talal.

Is Fox News a covert Rothschild mind control operation against the American people?

Sources:

1. “Mercenary Mischief in Zaire”. Jane Hunter. Covert Action Information Bulletin. Spring 1991.
2. Hot Money and the Politics of Debt. R.T. Naylor. The Linden Press/Simon & Schuster. New York. 1987. p.238
3. Hunter
4. Earth First! Journal. Vol. 26, #1. Samhain/Yule. 2005
5. “US to Aid Regimes to Oust Government”. David B. Ottaway. Washington Post. 11-10-96
6. The Great Heroin Coup: Drugs, Intelligence and International Fascism. Henrik Kruger. South End Press. Boston. 1980. p.43
7. The Gulf: Scramble for Security. Raj Choudry. Sreedhar Press. New Dehli.
8. 1983. p.14
9. Dude, Where’s My Country. Michael Moore. Warner Books. New York. 2003.
10. ABC News Online. 10-19-04

Dean Henderson is the author of Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network, The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries and Das Kartell der Federal Reserve. Subscriptions to his Left Hook blog are FREE at www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com

The American Plan To Liberalize “Islam”

[In 2003, long before any hint of an "Arab spring," the RAND Corp. produced the following document (click on title for pdf).  This is the strategy which has been followed by Barack Obama since Day One.  If the strategy is not a crime against humanity, or at least against religion itself, then it should be, since no man has the right to alter someone else's religion.  That is exactly what this strategy proposes and Obama has been fully committed to, changing Islam itself, from the inside out.  Liberalize it, so that it becomes as acceptable to the international community as any other religion.  This means removing all of the bloody parts of Islam, in order to manufacture a new liberalized product which resembles Sufi Islam, which is an acceptable substitute for Wahhabism. 

RAND proposes that we now introduce this Sufi-like anti-Wahhabism, in order to undo what we have done with the CIA's grand experiment in using American military power as a tool for social engineering.  The weaponized "Islam," followed by the weaponization of the Afghan "mujahedeen," who had received the new synthetic "Islam," produced the first generation of "jihadi" "holy warriors."   The incalculable damage which has been done to peace-loving Islam since then, by the introduction of the CIA's weaponized Wahhabi Islam to the Muslim world over the past three-and-a-half decades, is now to be undone in just one "Spring," or a half-dozen?  The scale of the arrogance shown by the American meddlers in purposely doing this, and now attempting to undo what they have done, in order to gain further advantage, is on the level of a Hitler, or a Mussolini. 

When is Obama, or some other evil wise ass going to straighten-out the deficiencies in Christianity, or (God forbid!) Judaism?  We have no right by any stretch of the imagination to do what has been laid-out in the 88-pages of Civil Democratic Islam.]

Civil Democratic Islam

RAND CORP.

2003 RAND Corporation

iii
PREFACE
The Islamic world is involved in a struggle to determine its own nature and values,
with serious implications for the future. What role can the rest of the world,
threatened and affected as it is by this struggle, play in bringing about a more
peaceful and positive outcome?
Devising a judicious approach requires a finely grained understanding of the
ongoing ideological struggle within Islam, to identify appropriate partners and
set realistic goals and means to encourage its evolution in a positive way.
The United States has three goals in regard to politicized Islam. First, it wants to
prevent the spread of extremism and violence. Second, in doing so, it needs to
avoid the impression that the United States is “opposed to Islam.” And third, in
the longer run, it must find ways to help address the deeper economic, social,
and political causes feeding Islamic radicalism and to encourage a move toward
development and democratization.
The debates and conflicts that mark the current Islamic world can make the
picture seem confusing. It becomes easier to sort the actors if one thinks of
them not as belonging to distinct categories but as falling along a spectrum.
Their views on certain critical marker issues help to locate them correctly on
this spectrum.
It is then possible to see which part of the spectrum is generally compatible
with our values, and which is fundamentally inimical. On this basis, this report
identifies components of a specific strategy.
This report should be of interest to scholars, policymakers, students, and all
others interested in the Middle East, Islam, and political Islam.

****************************

Chapter Three
A PROPOSED STRATEGY

The problem of Islamic radicalism—its manifestations, its underlying causes,
and its propensity to meld with other social and political conflicts—makes this
an extremely complex issue. There is no one correct approach or response, and
there certainly is not one identifiable “fix.” Instead, what is called for is a mixed
approach that rests on firm and decisive commitment to our own fundamental
values and understands that tactical and interest-driven cooperation is simply
not possible with some of the actors and positions along the spectrum of
political Islam but that possesses a sequence of flexible postures suitable to
different contexts, populations, and countries.
This approach seeks to strengthen and foster the development of civil, democratic
Islam and of modernization and development. It provides the necessary
flexibility to deal with different settings appropriately, and it reduces the danger
of unintended negative effects. The following outline describes what such a
strategy might look like:
• Support the modernists first, enhancing their vision of Islam over that of the
traditionalists by providing them with a broad platform to articulate and
disseminate their views. They, not the traditionalists, should be cultivated
and publicly presented as the face of contemporary Islam.
• Support the secularists on a case-by-case basis.
• Encourage secular civic and cultural institutions and programs.
• Back the traditionalists enough to keep them viable against the fundamentalists
(if and wherever those are our choices) and to prevent a closer
alliance between these two groups. Within the traditionalists, we should
selectively encourage those who are the relatively better match for modern
civil society. For example, some Islamic law schools are far more amenable
to our view of justice and human rights than are others.
• Finally, oppose the fundamentalists energetically by striking at vulnerabilities
in their Islamic and ideological postures, exposing things that neither the youthful idealists in their target audience nor the pious traditionalists
can approve of: their corruption, their brutality, their ignorance, the bias
and manifest errors in their application of Islam, and their inability to lead
and govern.
Some additional, more-direct activities will be necessary to support this overall
approach, such as the following:
• Help break the fundamentalist and traditionalist monopoly on defining,
explaining, and interpreting Islam.
• Identify appropriate modernist scholars to manage a Web site that answers
questions related to daily conduct and offers modernist Islamic legal opinions.
• Encourage modernist scholars to write textbooks and develop curricula.
• Publish introductory books at subsidized rates to make them as available as
the tractates of fundamentalist authors.
• Use popular regional media, such as radio, to introduce the thoughts and
practices of modernist Muslims to broaden the international view of what
Islam means and can mean.

****************************

Appendix C
STRATEGY IN DEPTH

The following describes, in somewhat more detail, how the recommendations
in Chapter Three could be implemented.
BASIC POINTS OF THE STRATEGY
Build Up a Modernist Leadership
Create role models and leaders. Modernists who risk persecution should be
built up as courageous civil rights leaders, which indeed they are. There are
precedents showing that this can work. Nawal Al-Sadaawi achieved international
renown for enduring persecution, harassment, and attempts to prosecute
her in court on account of her principled modernist stand on issues related to
freedom of speech, public health, and the status of women in Egypt. Afghan
interim minister of women’s affairs Sima Samar inspired many with her outspoken
stance on human rights, women’s rights, civil law, and democracy, for
which she faced death threats by fundamentalists. There are many others
throughout the Islamic world whose leadership can similarly be featured.
Include modern, mainstream Muslims in political “outreach” events, to reflect
demographic reality. Avoid artificially “over-Islamizing the Muslims”; instead,
accustom them to the idea that Islam can be just one part of their identity.1
Support civil society in the Islamic world. This is particularly important in situations
of crisis, refugee situations, and postconflict situations, in which a democratic
leadership can emerge and gain practical experience through local NGOs
and other civic associations. On the rural and neighborhood levels, as well, civic
associations are an infrastructure that can lead to political education and a
moderate, modernist leadership.
______________
1This idea is more extensively developed in Al-Azmah (1993). Al-Azmah is himself a “Euro-Muslim.”

 

Develop Western Islam: German Islam, U.S. Islam, etc. This requires gaining a
better understanding of the composition, as well as the evolving practice and
thought, in these communities. Assist in eliciting, expressing, and “codifying”
their views.
Go on the Offensive Against Fundamentalists
Delegitimize individuals and positions associated with extremist Islam. Make
public the immoral and hypocritical deeds and statements of self-styled fundamentalist
authorities. Allegations of Western immorality and shallowness are
a cherished part of the fundamentalist arsenal, but they are themselves highly
vulnerable on these fronts.
Encourage Arab journalists in popular media to do investigative reporting on
the lives and personal habits and corruption of fundamentalist leaders. Publicize
incidents that highlight their brutality—such as the recent deaths of Saudi
schoolgirls in a fire when religious police physically prevented Saudi firefighters
from evacuating the girls from their burning school building because they were
not veiled—and their hypocrisy, illustrated by the Saudi religious establishment,
which forbids migrant workers from receiving photographs of their newborn
children on the grounds that Islam forbids human images, while their own
offices are decorated by huge portraits of King Faisal, etc. The role of “charitable
organizations” in financing terror and extremism has begun to be more clearly
understood since September 11 but also deserves ongoing and public investigation.
Assertively Promote the Values of Western Democratic Modernity
Create and propagate a model for prosperous, moderate Islam by identifying
and actively aiding countries or regions or groups with the appropriate views.
Publicize their successes. For example, the 1999 Beirut Declaration for Justice
and the National Action Charter of Bahrain broke new ground in the application
of Islamic law and should be made more widely known.
Criticize the flaws of traditionalism. Show the causal relationship between
traditionalism and underdevelopment, as well as the causal relationship
between modernity, democracy, progress, and prosperity. Do fundamentalism
and traditionalism offer Islamic society a healthy, prosperous future? Are they
successfully meeting the challenges of the day? Do they compare well with
other social orders? The UNDP social development report (UNDP, 2002) points
clearly to the linkage between a stagnant social order, oppression of women,
poor educational quality, and backwardness. This message should be energetically
taken to Muslim populations.

Build up the stature of Sufism. Encourage countries with strong Sufi traditions
to focus on that part of their history and to include it in their school curricula.
Pay more attention to Sufi Islam.
Focus on Education and Youth
Committed adult adherents of radical Islamic movements are unlikely to be
easily influenced into changing their views. The next generation, however, can
conceivably be influenced if the message of democratic Islam can be inserted
into school curricula and public media in the pertinent countries. Radical fundamentalists
have established massive efforts to gain influence over education
and are unlikely to give up established footholds without a struggle. An equally
energetic effort will be required to wrest this terrain from them.
SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES TO SUPPORT THE STRATEGY
Thus, to accomplish the overall strategy, it will be necessary to
• Support the modernists and mainstream secularists first, by
— publishing and distribute their works
— encouraging them to write for mass audiences and youth
— introducing their views into the curriculum of Islamic education
— giving them a public platform
— making their opinions and judgments on fundamental questions of
religious interpretation available to a mass audience, in competition
with those of the fundamentalists and traditionalists, who already have
Web sites, publishing houses, schools, institutes, and many other vehicles
for disseminating their views
— positioning modernism as a “counterculture” option for disaffected
Islamic youth
— facilitating and encouraging awareness of pre- and non-Islamic history
and culture, in the media and in the curricula of relevant countries
— encouraging and supporting secular civic and cultural institutions and
programs.
• Support the traditionalists against the fundamentalists, by
— publicizing traditionalist criticism of fundamentalist violence and
extremism and encouraging disagreements between traditionalists and
fundamentalists
— preventing alliances between traditionalists and fundamentalists

— encouraging cooperation between modernists and traditionalists who
are closer to that end of the spectrum, increase the presence and profile
of modernists in traditionalist institutions
— discriminating between different sectors of traditionalism
— encouraging those with a greater affinity to modernism—such as the
Hanafi law school as opposed to others to issue religious opinions that,
by becoming popularized, can weaken the authority of backward
Wahhabi religious rulings
— encouraging the popularity and acceptance of Sufism.
• Confront and oppose the fundamentalists, by
— challenging and exposing the inaccuracies in their views on questions
of Islamic interpretation
— exposing their relationships with illegal groups and activities
— publicizing the consequences of their violent acts
— demonstrating their inability to rule to the benefit and positive development
of their communities
— targeting these messages especially to young people, to pious traditionalist
populations, to Muslim minorities in the West, and to women
— avoiding showing respect or admiration for the violent feats of fundamentalist
extremists and terrorists, instead casting them as disturbed
and cowardly rather than evil heroes
— encouraging journalists to investigate issues of corruption, hypocrisy,
and immorality in fundamentalist and terrorist circles.
• Selectively support secularists, by
— encouraging recognition of fundamentalism as a shared enemy, discouraging
secularist alliances with anti-U.S. forces on such grounds as
nationalism and leftist ideology
— supporting the idea that religion and the state can be separate in Islam,
too, and that this does not endanger the faith.

World View: Obama’s Meeting with Jordan’s Abdullah may Signal Troop Deployment

View Larger Map

[Mossad source Debkafile reports that Obama has ordered 20,000 US troops w/equipment to King Hussein Air Base Mafraq, near the border with Syria.  Mafraq is also the location of several refugee camps, holding hundreds of thousands of Syrians.  With the help of the little Jordanian king Obama may be about to try to tilt the scales of the Syrian civil war in favor of the so-called "moderate" faction.  If this is the case, then he probably informed the pig of Qatar of his decision this week, telling him to hold back on any further terrorist support until called upon to resume.  If Obama is foolish enough to pour his final conventional military resources "down a rat hole," into a futile attempt to prevent the total "Islamist" takeover of Syria, then he will not only turn Syria into another quagmire "ala Bush," but he will very likely enable the Saudis and Qatar to establish the dreaded "Caliphate" that the right-wing is constantly crying about. 

I don't know about you, but I don't think that I can peacefully withstand another round of Imperialist war.]

by John J. Xenakis 

• Demonstrators in Jordan protest American troop presence
• Jordan’s King Abdullah and Obama meet to discuss Syria
• Sunni Jihadists pour into Syria

Demonstrators in Jordan protest American troop presence

Anti-American protesters in Amman, Jordan on Friday (Al-Monitor)

Last week, we reported that the U.S. announced the formal deployment of 200 troops to Jordan. The troops will be “ready for military action” if President Barack Obama were to order it. On Friday, Jordanians rallied against the deployment of the U.S. forces in Jordan. Demonstrators also burned a mock American flag. At the end of the demonstration, they gathered in a circle and danced, chanting about Ali Baba and the forty thieves. Al-Monitor

Jordan’s King Abdullah and Obama meet to discuss Syria

The question of the use of chemical weapons by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad continued to draw worldwide attention on Friday. President Barack Obama met with Jordan’s King Abdullah II in the White House and said that “a line has been crossed” in Syria.

He said, “To use weapons of mass destruction on civilian populations crosses another line in terms of international norms and laws… That’s going to be a game changer.” However, he declined to intervene militarily until a “vigorous investigation” had been completed to find more “direct evidence.”

However, Debka, which sometimes gets things wrong, is quoting its military intelligence sources as saying that the purpose of Obama’s meeting with Abdullah is to firm up an agreement for the U.S. to deploy a 20,000 troop “surge” into Jordan. The 200 troops announced last week are to lay the groundwork for the main body to take up quarters in the King Hussein Air Base Mafraq, near the borders of Iraq and Syria.

The purpose of the “surge” is to protect Jordan’s royal family both from jihadists from Syria and from an “Arab Spring” type revolt — a step that the Obama administration did not take with Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, or Yemen. The “surge” will be heavily coordinated with Israeli forces, and buffer zones will be set up on Syria’s borders to prevent attacks on both Jordan and Israel.

This “surge” comes at a time when thousands of fighters from Iran-backed Shia militias from Iraq and Hizbollah are aiding the al-Assad regime forces and are threatening to defeat the opposition rebels. The Hill and Debka

Sunni Jihadists pour into Syria

With thousands of fighters from Iran-backed Shia militias arriving in Syria to support al-Assad’s regime, it’s not surprising that thousands of Sunni jihadists are also arriving in Syria to fight the Shia militias. In particular, disaffected Muslims from Germany and elsewhere in Europe have been heading for Syria to receive training in weapons and terrorist techniques. German analysts are concerned that these fighters are gaining experience in Syria, making contacts, and will return to Germany and conduct terrorist attacks there. Spiegel

The West Masterminded Chechen War to Destroy USSR and Russia

[Armenia's unique history make it highly unlikely that an Armenian would convert to radical Wahhabi "Islam" (SEE: Did 'Misha' influence Tsarnaevs? In Watertown, doubts ).]

The West Masterminded Chechen War to Destroy USSR and Russia – June, 2010

 

It is now known that the twenty year old Islamic insurgency in the Caucasus (according to many experts an Al-Qaeda operation) and the arming of Georgia had been an integral part of a long-term Western plan to wrestle the northern Caucasus region away from Russian control and place it under what some experts refer to as an Islamic Caliphate. Ankara, Baku and Tbilisi, as well as a steady stream of Islamic militants trained in Pakistan and Afghanistan, were the active participants in this agenda throughout much of the 1990s. Its funding and organization was carried out by a consortium of special interests in Washington and London and, most probably, in Tel Aviv and Riyadh as well. It is also now known that Western intelligence agencies also conspired to force Russia out of the Balkans (Yugoslavia in particular) and Central Asia by targeting pro-Russian bastions in those regions.

As it has been since the early 1980s, radical Islam was always the readily accessible tool the West exploited to carryout its geopolitical agenda.

Why should this seemingly Russian problem concern us Armenians? Armenians in general, diasporans in particular, seem to be having a hard time accepting that a weakened Russia in the Caucasus poses a serious long-term threat for Armenia. Those amongst us that do not possess clearness of thought regarding this matter, I would just like to say that the Caucasus without an effective Russian presence would prove disastrous not only for Armenia but for the entire Eurasian continent. Joining three important geopolitical zones – Europe, Asia and the Middle East – the Caucasus region is the gateway to Russia’s vulnerable south, its soft underbelly. The region is also a major hub for the strategic transfer of Eurasian energy and trade. Strategic planners have long realized that those who are able to control this region could potentially impact much of Eurasia and beyond.

As we all know, the Caucasus is not a bastion of Christianity or western civilization. The heavily Turkic and Islamic cultural and ethnic makeup of the region in question would not tolerate a non-aligned, a non-Turkic or a non-Islamic power in their midst – without a major outside power acting as a guarantor or as a counter weight. Against this Islamic and Turkic center-of-gravity, the Russian presence has been the only counter-influence in the region for the past two hundred years. And it is precisely because of this geopolitical reality in the Caucasus that we Armenians have been able to establish nation-state.

It is quite frightening that unbeknownst to most Armenians, because our collective attention has naturally been drawn to the Caucasus region’s east-west geopolitical plane, the northern Caucasus was actually on the verge of a radical Islamic/Turkic transformation throughout much of the 1990s. There is no doubt today that had the northern Caucasus fell victim to this agenda it would have been the south’s turn not much long thereafter.

In short, without a Russian presence in the Caucasus, the region in question will eventually transform itself into a Turkic/Islamic cesspool; and not even a million of our “fedayees” would be able to stop it from happening.

Had Western intentions for the Caucasus succeeded not only would we Armenians be lamenting the lose of Nagorno Karabakh today we would most probably be lamenting the lose of our fledgling republic as well. Under such a geopolitical scenario for the region, a best case scenario for Armenia would have been if it simply become politically and economically subordinate to Ankara, Baku and Tbilisi.

Those who complain about Armenia’s current dependence on Moscow need to take this geopolitical prospect into serious consideration.

Although Vladimir Putin’s Russia succeeded in crushing the Islamic terror onslaught in the northern Caucasus in the early 2000s and managed to defeat the Western backed regime in Georgia in 2008, Moscow nevertheless realizes that a potential threat continues to remain in the region. As a result, as long as ethnic Russians run the show in the Kremlin, Moscow will do everything in its power to have a strong presence in the Caucasus. And needless to say, Armenia is pivotal to the Kremlin’s regional agenda. As a result of the major setbacks suffered by Islamists and the West, Ankara has more-or-less abandoned its pan-Turkic agenda in the Caucasus and Central Asia and is currently seeking to move closer to Moscow.

Nevertheless, despite Ankara’s best efforts to befriend the Bear, Turks continue to fear Russia’s resurgence.

The following video presentations and articles deal with this topic. Those interested in learning more about the Islamic insurgency in the Caucasus and the grave threat it posed to the entire Caucasus region should read the following book – Chechen Jihad: http://www.amazon.com/Chechen-Jihad-Qaedas-Training-Ground/dp/0060841702

Arevordi